Why Microsoft should reveal SQL Server code

TalkBack 13 of 88:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Par course I suppose.

Wow NZ! Let's debug your riposte. It's sadly in need!

I said, Microsoft's license is deficient to "use the term Open Source or open source to refer to (it)". Did I say they cannot choose a particular license? Did I say they must choose a license I prefer? The answer to both questions is a resounding "No".

Directly: Microsoft can indeed choose any license they prefer, desire, or cotton to, in order to distribute their copyrighted software. However, they cannot call that software open source =until= they correct those aspects of their license that are deficient to the Open Source definition. By breaking apart the sentence you changed the emphasis and that's very bad argument technique as you well know.

Further, never did I say Microsoft has made the assertion of shared source being open source. I said Microsoft "should not": meaning they have the ability, but not the privelege and gave reasons why they don't have the privelege. I could have said "cannot", but that would denote Microsoft lacks the ability, which, given the multitude of quotes of other (unrelated) assertions made over the years; Microsoft certainly does possess the ability to make false assertions and true ones.

I don't have to assign a random quote to anyone Non-Zealot, because I attributed and quoted only two sources: John C's commentary and the Open Source Definition. At no time did I claim to quote Microsoft. Saying that someone "should not" do something does not imply that they currently do.

If I say, "You should not touch the hot stove, Non-Zealot." Does that imply that you are currently doing so or that you did? No, it doesn't. All that the statement implies is a warning that you should not. Likewise Microsoft "should not".

You may have read an attribution to Microsoft into my statement, but this was not my intent as I'm happy to clarify. Thank you for the opportunity. Please, don't put attributions in my mouth either. Even if you're trying to have fun?

Now, I'll be happy if John C understands that he should not either. Since he has already and the case as I've shown was weak, perhaps I should have used "must not", but I prefer to be understanding with my friends.

Posted by: John Le'Brecage   Posted on: 02/28/05 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Virtualization: Architectural Considerations And Other Evaluation Criteria VMware Of the many approaches to x86 systems virtualization available in the ... Download Now
• Email Security and Archiving - Clearer in the Cloud Google The time is NOW for businesses and organizations of all sizes to implement ... Download Now
• The Impact of Virtualization Software on Operating Environments VMware Today's use of virtualization technology allows IT professionals to ... Download Now