On Tue, Feb 22, 2000 at 01:46:52PM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> Use "free", not "open source" which means nothing and is only for the suits.
I agree that "free software" is to be preferred, but your argument
is strange. "Open source" is a precisely defined concept (and thus
"means nothing"
On Monday 21 February 2000, at 18 h 40, the keyboard of Javier Fdz-Sanguino
Pen~a <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Many of these components have been cloned under an Open Source
> license.
Use "free", not "open source" which means nothing and is only for the suits.
On Tuesday 22 February 2000, at 13 h 21, the keyboard of "Remco van 't Veer"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 6.1. How can I make Java servlets work?
> > ---
> > You can use:
> >
> > * GNUJSP
> >
> > * Apache Jserv
>
> Not yet packaged fo
On Mon, Feb 21, 2000 at 18:40, Javier Fdz-Sanguino Pen~a wrote:
> Feel free to send me any comments/suggestion ... *however* I hope
> that when a final 1.0 version of the FAQ is available somebody on the
> debian-java mailing lists adopts the FAQ since I will probably not be able
> to keep i
Javier Fdz-Sanguino Pen~a wrote:
> Feel free to send me any comments/suggestion ... *however* I hope
> that when a final 1.0 version of the FAQ is available somebody on the
> debian-java mailing lists adopts the FAQ since I will probably not be able
> to keep it up to date.
Raw notes:
You
Shouldn't we be using the term free-software instead of open-source?
6 matches
Mail list logo
