Re: [Fsfe-france] Re: pgAdmin is proprietary software

[Alexandre Dulaunoy]

On Sun, 18 May 2003, Dave Page wrote:

> It's rumoured that Loic Dachary once said:
> >
> >     Hi,
> >
> >     I'm only suggesting to display the fact that pgAdmin is under
> > a proprietary license in a clear way in the web pages and in the
> > distribution. Could you please do that ?
> >
> >     At present pgAdmin is a proprietary software hidden in a
> > deceptive Free Software wrapping. This deliberate strategy is not
> > honest, it is misleading for most pgAdmin users.
> 
> Hang on a second before you go accusing us of anything -
> 
> Question: Where exactly have we said that pgAdmin is Free Software or Open
> Source by the FSF's definition?
> Answer: Nowhere.

It's written : 

http://pgadmin.postgresql.org/pgadmin2.php?ContentID=6

"pgAdmin II  is an open  source application written  using Microsoft's
Visual  Basic  6.0  Service  Pack   5.  It  is  built  around  4  main
components:"

There is a comment from Justin also on this matter...

> 
> Question: Are the terms of use for pgAdmin made clear on the website?
> 
> Answer: Yes. In numerous places including the second paragraph of the
> front page of the website where it says:
> It is freely available under the terms of the pgAdmin Public Licence and
> may be redistributed provided the terms of the licence are adhered to.
> Including a link to the licence.
> 
> I do a lot of work with pgAdmin and other Open Source software, including
> work with the UK government and the one thing I come across again and
> again is this attitude that software that doesn't conform to the FSF's
> view of the ways things should be is evil. In my mind this makes people
> that share this view as bad as companies like Microsoft and I have had
> first hand experience of such attitudes actually turning people against
> the ideals being preached because of the narrow mindedness and apparent
> fanaticism of those preaching them.
> We (the pgAdmin team), like anyone else can release software under
> whatever terms we like as long as they are legal. We have tried to make
> them fair to the end user to allow them freedom, whilst retaining some
> control over our hundreds of hours of hard work. 
> I for one really don't
> care if the FSF don't like our licence because I know at heart that we
> have never tried to deceive anyone, and have always tried to give end
> users and developers like you and I as much freedom as possible whilst
> protecting ourselves from corporate exploitation.

Do you  plan to change  the licensing to  be compatible with  the Free
Software definition or the OSI definition ? 

Thanks a lot. 

adulau


-- 
--                   Alexandre Dulaunoy (adulau) -- http://www.foo.be/
--         http://pgp.ael.be:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x44E6CBCD
--         "Knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance
--                                that we can solve them" Isaac Asimov