Lists Home |
Date Index |
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 9:30 am, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> john c hardin wrote:
> > The best advice I can give is to go to source-forge and start one. the
> > licensing might be best served by patterning it after the GPL (i think
> > that stands for GNU Public License).
> Please don't pattern it *after* the GPL. Use *the* GPL; or perhaps use
> an alternate license that better suits your needs and desires. However,
> please don't contribute to the increasing problem of license
> proliferation. Chances are extremely good there's already a license that
> meets your needs well.
Yeah. one of the big problems that I am grappling with is how to make it so
that there is a commercial product and xml developers can get a cut in the
As I said before, one of the dislikes of some xml efforts I've seen so far is
the inability to get paid for introducing it to a company.
With big companies it's ok, introduce it, and milk a big salary for a long
time by being an expert. But the same approach doesn't work that way for
I guess one route that I'm considering is to make the componentry open-source
and the GUIs available as a low-cost dual-license item. That way the
tinkerers amongst us could bash together something elaborate (and of course
expensive) or the SME could just buy something cheap that is all done
The componentry is the parsers, the (multi-channel) communications and the
database schema. All specifically designed for xml-accounting and
I'm going to mull some more on this....
while I do this... can we please have some jazz playing or the next
installment in the Monty Python story...
I think it's important that we stay on-topic and all this is making my brain
btw, thanks to everybody that replied so far.
Computergrid : The ones with the most connections win.