On Thu, 7 Dec 2006, Andy Sy wrote:
As I have made clear countless times, I am not saying
copyleft style provisions are unfair nor am I against
them, only that it is very disingenuous to characterize
it as giving someone more freedom. How can something
with strings attached be considered more "f
Rage Callao wrote:
> Yup, and you are free to modify the compiler so
> that it doesn't generate that "warning bug"
> now aren't you.
Another non-sequitur. I was referring to the attitude
that tries to attach strings and preachy agendas along
with the 'gift' of open sourced code and how it can
of
On 12/6/06, Andy Sy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What other reason would there be to write a piece of software?
To spread a political idea? I'm afraid a piece of software
written with that primary goal in mind is not likely to be
very succesful.
Case-in-point: There was an extremely annoying and
Mhac Janapin wrote:
> I'm just galled by people who act like they have
> no Utang na Loob. I think we are indebted to these
> guys who started out GNU/Linux.
If it is being offered for free why should we be
"in debt"...? ;-)
Don't forget GPL-ed code comes with strings attached.
I happen to thin
On 12/6/06, Andy Sy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A 'commie', however, would be someone who believes that the
above is NOT ok solely out of "principle". And if you don't
believe Stallman and Co. are of this mindset, you are either
being deliberately dishonest or you fail to read their
manifestos pr
Rage Callao wrote:
> You use OSS tools because its practical for you. The
> people who created most of those tools you find practical
> didn't make them just for practical reasons.
What other reason would there be to write a piece of software?
To spread a political idea? I'm afraid a piece of so
On 12/5/06, Andy Sy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You definitely sound like someone who has been drinking the
Richard Stallman Kool-Aid. I DO NOT choose a tool because of its
license, I choose it because it is practical and fits my
needs.
Oh c'mon man, you can do better than that can you? I could
On 12/5/06, Andy Sy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Rage Callao wrote:
> Your reality is not my reality. Open source is not about the
> appropriateness
> of any particular tool but the freedom to use the tools. Check out
> http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php
You definitely sound like someo
Rage Callao wrote:
> Your reality is not my reality. Open source is not about the
> appropriateness
> of any particular tool but the freedom to use the tools. Check out
> http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php
You definitely sound like someone who has been drinking the
Richard Stallman Koo
Congress is in recess till November 6 ;)
And the house leadership is more keen in creating miracles for cha-cha
to push through.After being forwarded to the Committees on ICT and Trade
and Industry, we were promised it would be tackled before the year
ends... e, you know how it is with pro
On 11/2/06, jan gestre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11/2/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> What happened?
>
i tried to check the house of representative's website, i can't the house
bill no. 5769 which is suppose to be the Free/Open Source Software (FOSS)
Act of 2006, i also t
On 11/2/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
What happened?i tried to check the house of representative's website, i can't the house bill no. 5769 which is suppose to be the Free/Open Source Software (FOSS) Act of
2006, i also tried looking at the bills authored/co-authored by rep. casin
What happened?
--
the thing i like with my linux pc is that i can sum up my complaints in 5 items
_
Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List
plug@lists.linux.org.ph (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph)
Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists
Sea
China is going Linux all the way but it is behind the Great Firewall of China, meanwhile proprietary softwares are protected by international trade treaties like GATT, Apec, Nafta, Afta etc, thats why BSA is around.
thadOn 8/8/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/7/06, Peter Santiag
On 8/7/06, Peter Santiago <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Rogelio Serrano wrote:
> On 8/7/06, John Peter Loh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 8/7/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Independence is not about cutting ties with the US at all. Its showing
>> > the capability to do w
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Santiago" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Technical Discussion List"
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 11:17 PM
Subject: Re: [plug] Open source bill – it’s about time
What I do hope to see reg
On 8/7/06, Peter Santiago <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This topic is going way off tangent. Whether the open source bill will
be good or bad, I don't know (one has to check the bunch of legalese
they will put in). For me, it's a question of whether or not use the
appropriate tool for the job. It
Rogelio Serrano wrote:
On 8/7/06, John Peter Loh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/7/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Independence is not about cutting ties with the US at all. Its showing
> the capability to do what we want to anybody.
That doesn't sound right.
First result fr
On 8/7/06, John Peter Loh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/7/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Independence is not about cutting ties with the US at all. Its showing
> the capability to do what we want to anybody.
That doesn't sound right.
First result from define:independence
>
On 8/7/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Independence is not about cutting ties with the US at all. Its showingthe capability to do what we want to anybody.That doesn't sound right.First result from define:independence
freedom from control or influence of another or others -- John Pe
On 8/6/06, Tata Dano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >From Manila Standard.
>
> "1. The country can reduce reliance and spending on imports. Most
> proprietary operating systems and business applications come from the
> United States, and developing countries such as the Philippines end up
> import
On 8/6/06, Tata Dano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Its because we are tuta by this imperialist US...susunod sunod lang tayo sa
gusto nila dahil hawak tayo economically and politically. Well, its just my
personal opinion based on all the research and readings that i have.
I dunno about this, but
although this series of threads is political in nature, kindly restrict
comments to the issue at hand. last time i heard, PLUG is still apolitical.
thanks.
ciao!
--
"Programming, an artform that fights back"
Anuerin G. Diaz
Registered Linux User #246176
Friendly Linux Board @ http://mandriv
>From Manila Standard."1. The country can reduce reliance and spending on imports. Most
proprietary operating systems and business applications come from theUnited States, and developing countries such as the Philippines end upimporting millions of dollars worth of software licenses. On the other
h
On 7/26/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/27/06, thad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> Stallman is the no1 supporter of Chavez in US, just read read his blog. InWTF> fact he even endorse to to fill in gas at Citgo, one of the biggest
> distributor of gas here in US, owned by Venez
On 8/4/06, Kenneth P. Oncinian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sorry. I dont know how this happened, really.
This is not the email that I replied to.
Either my eyes played trick on me or I have found
a zimbra bug.
No, your previous message is very apt.
Talk about this open source bill presupposes
On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 12:16 +0800, Rogelio Serrano wrote:
> >From Manila Standard.
>
> "1. The country can reduce reliance and spending on imports. Most
> proprietary operating systems and business applications come from the
> United States, and developing countries such as the Philippines end up
-
From: Kenneth P. Oncinian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Philippine Linux Users' Group Technical Discussion List
Sent: Friday, August 4, 2006 1:08:55 PM GMT-0200
Subject: Re: [plug] Open source bill – it’s about time
alis ako ng 1:25 eksakto
Kenneth P. Oncinian
Information Syste
so what's anti-american in this statement?
"1. The country can reduce reliance and spending on imports. Mostproprietary operating systems and business applications come from theUnited States, and developing countries such as the Philippines end up
importing millions of dollars worth of software lic
4, 2006 12:16:14 PM GMT-0200
Subject: Re: [plug] Open source bill – it’s about time
On 8/4/06, Junix Gaspar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 7/27/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 7/27/06, thad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
On 8/4/06, Junix Gaspar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/27/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/27/06, thad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Stallman is the no1 supporter of Chavez in US, just read read his blog.
In
>
> WTF
???
> > fact he even endorse to to fill in gas a
On 7/27/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/27/06, thad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> Stallman is the no1 supporter of Chavez in US, just read read his blog. InWTF???
> fact he even endorse to to fill in gas at Citgo, one of the biggest
> distributor of gas here in US, owned by
On 7/27/06, Dax Cordova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
i think the bill is in the making already becase ive heard some company is helping that congressman already. hope it comes out soon enough
some company? who are these company or companies? what are their line of business? vested interest? self ser
i think the bill is in the making already becase ive heard some company is helping that congressman already. hope it comes out soon enough
_
Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List
plug@lists.linux.org.ph (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph)
Read the G
On 7/27/06, thad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Stallman is the no1 supporter of Chavez in US, just read read his blog. In
WTF
fact he even endorse to to fill in gas at Citgo, one of the biggest
distributor of gas here in US, owned by Venezuela which Chavez nationalized.
Is it anti-american-
Stallman is the no1 supporter of Chavez in US, just read read his blog. In fact he even endorse to to fill in gas at Citgo, one of the biggest distributor of gas here in US, owned by Venezuela which Chavez nationalized. Is it anti-american--- this is all but FUD. Look at Fortune top 500 companies
On 7/27/06, Jun Salen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There are discussion regarding this topic from last
few threads. There is already one congressman that may
start to propose a first bill regarding OSS. Please
read Manila Standard
http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/?page=business06_july25_2006
arti
There are discussion regarding this topic from last
few threads. There is already one congressman that may
start to propose a first bill regarding OSS. Please
read Manila Standard
http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/?page=business06_july25_2006
article. I get this link from Newsforge.
Thanks,
jun
On 7/19/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/19/06, manny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006, jan gestre wrote:
>
> >> Uhhh... what's the difference? It's just a complete inverse of the
> >> statement.
>
> No it's not. His emphasizes that we stick with proprietary fir
On 7/19/06, manny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006, jan gestre wrote:
>> Uhhh... what's the difference? It's just a complete inverse of the
>> statement.
No it's not. His emphasizes that we stick with proprietary firsta nd then
try to get FOSS in here and there. Mine says dump pro
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006, jan gestre wrote:
Uhhh... what's the difference? It's just a complete inverse of the
statement.
No it's not. His emphasizes that we stick with proprietary firsta nd then
try to get FOSS in here and there. Mine says dump proprietayr altogether
except in th efew places it
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rogelio Serrano
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 2:01 PM
To: Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Technical Discussion List
Subject: Re: [plug] open source bill
On 7/19/06, Rage Callao <[EMAIL P
Hi Dean!
On 7/18/06, Dean Michael Berris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yeah, well DOST has employees that maintain the OpenBSD systems -- the
employees cost money to keep. Although I do understand that the
savings come at the price of accountability and "someone to blame when
it all goes wrong", it
On 7/19/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think it would be hard to get a single recommendation. The most
important thing is put something into law so that sometime in the
future all software needs by anybody in the philippines is available
on the net by download for free.
I comp
On 7/19/06, Rage Callao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ok, let's try getting everybody back to the table.
An open source bill will only be helpful if it does any of these things:
1. Mandates -- seems to be whole lot of disagreement on this one
2. Favors -- disagreements too, but likely
3. Promotes -
mouth works somehow, but the industry and the developers have to pick
it up first and improve it to the point of "marketability" -- more
users of the software would be nice, but that's not what's really
needed right now. Some software might be argued "market ready" like
OpenOffice, Mozilla [Firefo
On 7/19/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Right now the development initiaitive is left to private enterprise and
individuals and foreign donors.
>We have always been good at imitating others anyway.
If we leave that to the government it will take forever. In this country the
initiati
>Right now the development initiaitive is left to private enterprise and
individuals and foreign donors.
>We have always been good at imitating others anyway.
If we leave that to the government it will take forever. In this country the
initiative usually comes from private enterprise as the gover
On 7/19/06, Dean Michael Berris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/19/06, jan gestre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> why oppose the bill, its not even crafted yet, if it would help to promote
> the use of FOSS then great, if not fine, at least the distinguish gentleman
> tried, right? look at the brigh
On 7/19/06, jan gestre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
why oppose the bill, its not even crafted yet, if it would help to promote
the use of FOSS then great, if not fine, at least the distinguish gentleman
tried, right? look at the bright side, once this bill reached the floor for
deliberation, it wil
On 7/19/06, Dean Michael Berris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/19/06, Rage Callao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:>> An open source bill will only be helpful if it does any of these things:>
> Of course, there's no point to an open source bill if it doesn't> contain any of the above.>Is an open source b
On 7/19/06, Rage Callao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
An open source bill will only be helpful if it does any of these things:
Of course, there's no point to an open source bill if it doesn't
contain any of the above.
Is an open source bill even required in the first place? What will the
mot
Ok, let's try getting everybody back to the table.
An open source bill will only be helpful if it does any of these things:
1. Mandates -- seems to be whole lot of disagreement on this one
2. Favors -- disagreements too, but likely
3. Promotes -- probable and doesn't seem to step on as many toes.
On 7/18/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/18/06, jan gestre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:>> and for those cynics that says FOSS can't topple big bad bill, read your> history books, microsoft didn't start out big then toppled big blue(ibm)
> instantly, he worked his ass off.>> and for
On 7/18/06, jan gestre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
and for those cynics that says FOSS can't topple big bad bill, read your
history books, microsoft didn't start out big then toppled big blue(ibm)
instantly, he worked his ass off.
and for those saying that there is no money being in the FOSS bu
On 7/18/06, manny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You've got it backwards. The more pragmatic way is to say we should use
open source software everywhere we can NOW, and then retain or use
proprietary software in the meantime in places where we can't use open
source software. The government will save
On 7/18/06, John Peter Loh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/18/06, manny <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Being pragmatic about it says: okay, let's use> proprietary software while there aren't any cheaper alternatives for> us the meantime -- now when someone else creates open source versions> or alter
On 7/18/06, manny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Being pragmatic about it says: okay, let's use> proprietary software while there aren't any cheaper alternatives for> us the meantime -- now when someone else creates open source versions> or alternatives, then perhaps we can asses them then.
You've go
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
Yeah, well DOST has employees that maintain the OpenBSD systems -- the
employees cost money to keep.
It doesn't cost much more to maintain BSD systems than proprietary
systems. Itr usually costs far less because you need fewer administrators
an
On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I agree. Depends on the solution. and cloning ms office like all of them
have been doing just dont cut it. even integration the mac way dont cut it.
>a new solution is needed. a new approach.
Google is trying something new. But its dependent
>I agree. Depends on the solution. and cloning ms office like all of them
have been doing just dont cut it. even integration the mac way dont cut it.
>a new solution is needed. a new approach.
Google is trying something new. But its dependent on a broadband connection
which is still difficult to
On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rogelio Serrano
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 4:33 PM
To: Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Technical Discussion List
Subject: Re: [plug]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rogelio Serrano
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 4:33 PM
To: Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Technical Discussion List
Subject: Re: [plug] open source bill
On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL P
On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I can tell you how to make a sprinkler, can you compete with TYCO? Chances
are you cant, no one can compete with them. Does this mean they no longer
of course thats not software. i dont have the proper production
facilities at my disposal.
le
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rogelio Serrano
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 4:13 PM
To: Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Technical Discussion List
Subject: Re: [plug] open source bill
On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL P
On 7/18/06, John Peter Loh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snipped..]
I'd like to contribute to an open source traffic management/monitoring
system. It's one of the major problems that I want to help in fixing it (or
alleviate the problem at least).
Its actually easy to get the numbers its the dis
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rogelio Serrano
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 4:08 PM
To: Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Technical Discussion List
Subject: Re: [plug] open source bill
On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL P
On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snopped...]
It maybe convenient but its true. There is no way you can run a government
exactly the same as a company, they are different on many levels.
thats a very arguable point but...
oh sorry i thought i was in a social science list.
>Yes they know their stuff and they dont tell everybody else. If the
knowledge was available to everybody else then they would not be that big.
>They get their revenue from software sales. Service companies dont. I was
speaking in narrow terms. Software selling companies treat software as
>proper
On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>dont design software that needs support. if the developer dont know how the
software is used to accomplish task you cannot make software that dont need
>>support.
Seriously, even products from companies like IBM, Novell and Redhat have
proble
On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rogelio Serrano
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 2:04 PM
To: Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Technical Discussion List
Subject: Re: [plug]
On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 20:25 +0800, Dean Michael Berris wrote:> It doesn't make sense to lower the count of Windows based machines in> government because if it works for them, why do we need to change it?
[snipped]>Because Windows is a very insecure
On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The difference of the University of California is that it is a private
company, if it is a public school it is still governed by its charter, they
can do evrything as long as it is under their charter. Including refusing
entry to students for wha
I'd like to contribute to an open source traffic
management/monitoring system. It's one of the major problems that I want to help
in fixing it (or alleviate the problem at least). Anyway, I agree that
the government should not require open source on all computers. But I do want
them to condu
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rogelio Serrano
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 1:53 PM
To: Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Technical Discussion List
Subject: Re: [plug] open source bill
On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL P
On 7/18/06, Dean Michael Berris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/17/06, manny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:>> Well, DOST 7 went OpenBSD, and they are more secure becaus eof it. And it> cost them a whole lot less than if they went with proprietary software.
> And the BSD servers require very little main
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rogelio Serrano
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 1:51 PM
To: Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Technical Discussion List
Subject: Re: [plug] open source bill
On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL P
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rogelio Serrano
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 2:04 PM
To: Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Technical Discussion List
Subject: Re: [plug] open source bill
>I work for a service company. Yo
On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Software is a tool, nothing more. Unless its your business that is.
Governments role is to run the country, public works, health care, public
safety etc. It may use software, to do its job, but software merely
accelarates the process. It is
On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 20:29 +0800, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
> > The Government is _NOT_ a software development firm, and its
> > function is to protect the sovereignity of the country and its
> > constituents, and provide the basic ser
On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snipped]
[snipped]
> And if we do put Linux on every government machine, where does the
> government get the support for it? Canonical, RedHat, Novell, IBM,
> Sun? How is that in line with the government's agenda to help out the
> constituency
On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 20:29 +0800, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
> The Government is _NOT_ a software development firm, and its function
> is to protect the sovereignity of the country and its constituents,
> and provide the basic services requir
On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 20:29 +0800, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
> The Government is _NOT_ a software development firm, and its function
> is to protect the sovereignity of the country and its constituents,
> and provide the basic services requir
On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 20:25 +0800, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
> It doesn't make sense to lower the count of Windows based machines in
> government because if it works for them, why do we need to change it?
[snipped]
>Because Windows is a very insecure OS?
>Why should our government pay to safe
On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 20:29 +0800, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
> The Government is _NOT_ a software development firm, and its function
> is to protect the sovereignity of the country and its constituents,
> and provide the basic services required by the same constituency that
> it serves. The
On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 20:25 +0800, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
> It doesn't make sense to lower the count of Windows based machines in
> government because if it works for them, why do we need to change it?
Because Windows is a very insecure OS?
Why should our government pay to safeguard Microsoft
On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 20:29 +0800, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
> The Government is _NOT_ a software development firm, and its function
> is to protect the sovereignity of the country and its constituents,
> and provide the basic services required by the same constituency that
> it serves. The govern
On 7/18/06, Dean Michael Berris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/17/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just curious, why do you have to put it under an open source license?
Why not a proprietary _source available_ license? Government needs to
_use_ the software -- not redistribute
On 7/18/06, Dean Michael Berris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/17/06, manny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Well, DOST 7 went OpenBSD, and they are more secure becaus eof it. And it
> cost them a whole lot less than if they went with proprietary software.
> And the BSD servers require very little
On 7/17/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/17/06, Dean Michael Berris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Write the whole thing under an open source license? How much will that
> cost? Where will you find developers that will do this for free?
I dont know. Maybe someone has written it
On 7/17/06, manny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, DOST 7 went OpenBSD, and they are more secure becaus eof it. And it
cost them a whole lot less than if they went with proprietary software.
And the BSD servers require very little maintenance. Just guess how much
the government would have saved
On 7/17/06, Rafael 'Dido' Sevilla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That is of course patently untrue. Free Software speaks about Freedom
not price. Isipin mong Kalayaan at hindi Libre. Richard Stallman
advocated these ideals more than a decade before the Open Source
movement even formally existed. I
Hi Kaloy,I think Bayan Muna Representatives might get interested with our efforts last September of 2005 when we conducted the first ever Open Source Literacy Project for the Out-of-School Youth in San Antonio, Ozamiz City duly funded and supported by BAYAN MUNA. With that we were recognized by the
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
Savings? You do see that using FOSS will require support which the
government still has to pay for -- just the same as acquiring and
using proprietary software. I for one would not want to run a
government that tried to do everything by itself and
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
Okay, now I get it. But then again, it's a catch 22 -- if the software
that does the job is not under any open source license, and the
government will require all software to be used/acquired to be under
an open source license, what will be done?
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
Yes, these are big plusses. However, the predicament that we are
currently in -- the government currently using non-open source
solutions that _already work_ and open source solutions (locally
grown) that work but not as well as I personally would
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
Write the whole thing under an open source license? How much will that
cost? Where will you find developers that will do this for free?
May not cost much. In fact, there's a ghood chance that the application
already exists and will require only
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
Guaranteed access? If it's stipulated in the awarded contract that the
code is made available to the government, then _that_ is guaranteed
access enough.
That depends on what kind of access is granted. Seeing the code is NOT
enough for some. The
On 7/17/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What should be done is have the government hire programmers so they
put together software that meets government needs and provide it for
free to others who will need it. And in so doing get automatic peer
review from the thousands of program
On 7/17/06, Tito Mari Francis Escaño <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/15/06, Dean Michael Berris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, these are big plusses. However, the predicament that we are
> currently in -- the government currently using non-open source
> solutions that _already work_ and open s
1 - 100 of 229 matches
Mail list logo
