Cameron Laird wrote: > Steven D'Aprano wrote: > >Hiding source code is incompatible with Open Source software. You can hide > >code, or be Open Source, but not both.
[...] > I also disagree with your characterization of Open Source. I don't know which part of the open source movement would tolerate the hiding of source code whilst simultaneously calling the resulting software "open source", but I'd imagine they'd have a hard time justifying their "open source" label. Of course, it is possible to be the "First Iranian Open Source Community" in terms of consuming open source software rather than producing it, so perhaps that's what the questioner intended to communicate in their signature. [...] > Myself, I just marvel at the different worlds in which we live. *My* > experience has to do with how tough it is to deploy and maintain > correct, working stuff, even with teams of seasoned pros. The thought > that users will routinely reverse-engineer our applications, and ... > well, I marvel. I've previously mentioned a very interesting paper which not only described the reverse engineering of the Skype protocol and software but also described how to make interoperating Skype clients. Given that the well-financed developers spent a lot of time introducing various protection measures (encryption, verification, etc.) and yet someone can write the aforementioned stuff up in a paper, I'd recommend an upgrade to any business plan which relies on obfuscation to prevent "unauthorised" use or modification. Indeed, I'd recommend that any such entrepreneur think twice about starting a traditional proprietary software business in this day and age. Paul -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
