Cygwin participation threshold
Wed Feb 24 05:51:00 GMT 1999
On 23-Feb-1999, Christopher Faylor <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 22, 1999, Carl Zmola wrote:
> >The fact that a company is in charge of
> >coordinating the efforts has an effect.
> >In the past the main reason I didn't even investigate contributing is :
> >Because of the feeling that contributions are unwanted, and that someone
> >else is making money of of my work.
> >After a little investigation, I found that these wern't valid concerns, but
> >they are a first line of resistance.
> It is interesting that you felt this way at first. I wonder if the reason
> has anything to do with the name "Cygwin" which sounds so similar to "Cygnus".
> The reason I am saying this is because hundreds of people have contributed to
> the linux project and *many* companies make money from linux.
Yes, but you can write and distribute proprietry applications or even
proprietry kernel modules for Linux without paying anyone a license fee.
The same is not true for Cygwin (although it *was* true once, back around
version b16, when it was called gnu-win32).
Fergus Henderson <email@example.com> | "Binaries may die
WWW: < http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh > | but source code lives forever"
PGP: finger firstname.lastname@example.org | -- leaked Microsoft memo.
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to email@example.com
More information about the Cygwin