(no subject)

[warlord at MIT.EDU (Derek Atkins)]

ron.peterson at yellowbank.com writes:

> Sure there are.  But in the context of the discussion, most are moot.

Sure, the definition about sailing is moot, but that doesn't help.

> It takes a pretty sophisticated argument to make the point that
> bitkeeper is 'free software'.  Yes, you don't have to pay for it.
> That's one definition of free.

Well, then, how more sophisticated do you need to get?  You just made
my point.

   You don't have to pay for bitkeeper.
   That's one definition of free.
   Therefore, bitkeeper is free.

>    But it's not the definition in common
> parlance in the software world.  I'm sure you know that.

This all depends on who you talk to.  Some people are more vehement
than others about what they consider "free".  That's why I asked the
question.  I think a number of people DO consider bitkeeper "free" --
it all depends on the beholder.  WHICH IS WHY I ASKED what their
definition of "free" is!

-derek

-- 
       Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
       Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board  (SIPB)
       URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/    PP-ASEL-IA     N1NWH
       warlord at MIT.EDU                        PGP key available