POP with REV ?
alex at tweedly.net
Tue Oct 18 05:45:41 CDT 2005
Sean Shao wrote:
>> I understand why you'd initially hope for direct support within Rev -
>> but given the availability of two excellent Open Source, well
>> supported alternatives, I don't think it's anything to be concerned
>> about; if anything, I prefer having the Open Source versions, since
>> it let me build in a couple of personal variations to the library
>> when I used it.
> I'd like to point out something in regards to libPop3 (as well as all
> the other libraries I've written to date) - they are in the "Public
> Domain" and not "Open Source" I do not like the restrictions and
> licensing needed for "Open Source".
> I don't know what the licensing for Sarah's library is, but I'm sure
> she has it marked on her website or in the download.
The terms are confusing and often used in different ways, but I believe
one of the best explanations of the various terms is the one at
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html (or at least, it agrees
with the way I think about Open Source, etc.)
It shows "Public Domain" as one of the subsets of "Open Source" - and
that's how I've always used it.
But I apologise if that confuses anyone, or disagrees with their
Alex Tweedly http://www.tweedly.net
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.14/131 - Release Date: 12/10/2005
More information about the use-livecode