Re: Hmm. Why no binaries?

[Michael Gogins <michael.gogins@...>]

There is a difference between open source and free software, on the
one hand, and commercial software, on the other hand.

Commercial software is a capitalist enterprise. The usual contract
between buyer and seller is that the buyer pays, the seller provides
something that works more or less out of the box.

Open source and free software are co-operative enterprises - they are
socialist, in a way. This is true whether they are given away, funded
publicly (a lot of government software is available this way), or
funded privately (as at least some of LuaJIT seems to be). For many
reasons, the commercial contract does not apply in open source and
free software.

Sometimes (usually?) the software is a pure gift. So then, you really
have no right to demand of the giver more than you are already
receiving, since you are not paying anything for it at all, although
of course you are free to make requests or offer advice.

In other cases, the open source or free software is part of an
implicit co-operative exchange. I make Apache for you, and you make
GCC for me. Like that. I can see LuaJIT being a part of this kind of
co-operative economy.

Then also, the open source/free software world grew out of the world
of Unix hackers where the ability to write, compile, and install C
programs was pretty much an entry level requirement.

This is just by way of providing context...

Mike Gogins

In

On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 10:30 AM, Axel Kittenberger <axkibe@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ah, but that's the point: 'product' is not the right word here.
>
> I disagree, 'product' is a good word for FreeSoftware* 'Products'. One
> doesn't have to understand it too commercially due to the commercial
> world we live in. I refer constantly to my FreeSoftware Project
> 'Lsyncd' as 'product', albeit I didn't get yet a cent for it (except I
> originally wrote it to do my job I'm paid for). In the software world
> I see 'a product' in contrast to 'a hack'. The second one is some code
> trimmed down to exactly your use case on your system, configuration
> likely directly in the source code and likely no documentation. A
> FreeSoftware product comes with a configure script / or configurable
> makefile, documentation and runs on a varity of systems, configuration
> and a span of different use cases.
>
> On the topic on hand, I just consider it insolent to ask Mark to do it
> all. As I said, being Free Project noting stops you to step forward an
> do it. Then maybe ask Mark to link or maybe host the files.
>
> *Having listened to a Stallman talk I also now refer rather to
> FreeSoftware than to OpenSource since the major feature is that it
> does not take your freedom from you and gives somebody the power to
> dicatate over you, cause you cannot help it without source and proper
> license.
>
>



-- 
Michael Gogins
Irreducible Productions
http://www.michael-gogins.com
Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com