From: Barry S. <che...@ch...> - 2009-03-29 19:39:39
|
Adam Twardoch <lis...@tw...> skribis: > But fortunately, this example illustrates perfectly how a commercial > operation (such as FontLab or DTL) can co-exist peacefully with > opensource development which is not backed in a commercial way (like > FontForge). It shows that both variants have their advantages and > neither is a "perfect solution". This is a misattribution. FontForge crashes all the time not because it is non-commercial, but because George writes the code (as a hobby AFAIK) without checking what he writes or testing it very much (RTFM!) and few other people make contributions. If a company -- let's call it "Font Awesome Plus Plus" -- were to provide serious resources towards the development of FontForge, then the situation could be different, and the co-existence might be very rewarding. FontForge isn't copylefted, so of course there would have to be some mutual goodwill in the relationship, if FontForge were to benefit from it. BTW I bought a "consumer-packaged" router recently, and it came with a copy of the GPL (in its own little booklet) and with a web address where I could download the source code. My UPS also is supported by the company with free code, though I think it's under some other license. Gcc works very well indeed, and a lot of ordinary Windows users seem to be happier with Firefox than with its non-free alternatives. |