Am 17. Jan, 2004 schw=E4tzte Trent Shipley so:
> If a CIO the YAST license wouldn't bother me one little bit -- remember a=
lmost
> everyone *uses* software. A good CIO buys software and tries hard not to
> write software. As a CIO you do not want to waste time reading GPL code =
--
> you *don't care* if you cand read the source code, if you have employees
> reading source code then you've already done something incompetent.
I disagree with this as a blanket statement. It depends on the company and
business needs. At Motorola our engineers certainly should have been readin=
g
code :). That often included proprietary code that Mot had purchased.
Lets say, though, that it's for a company that generally wouldn't be
reading/writing code as part of what it's selling. There still might be
times that having employees or consultants reading code is a business need.
Maybe doing a code review for security reasons. Maybe fixing a bug that
isn't otherwise getting fixed. I certainly have wished we could pay someone
to fix proprietary code on more than one occasion ( and at least once the
proprietary code belonged to the company I was working at ).
There's also the case where the company could be giving back to the
community from which it's gotten all this great software ;-).
I understand what you're trying to say, but just like 'outsourcing',
sometimes it makes business sense, sometimes it doesn't.
ciao,
der.hans
--=20
# https://www.LuftHans.com/ http://www.AZOTO.org/
# "I decry the current tendency to seek patents on algorithms. There are
# better ways to earn a living than to prevent other people from making us=
e
# of one's contributions to computer science." -- Donald E. Knuth
(text/plain)