Re: Reason not to go to V6R1

There's a big difference between getting the source from a vendor, and having a package that's open source.

Typically, an open source package not only gives you the source code, but it also gives you the right to derive works from it, to re-distribute the original package, and to distribute your derivatives.

(Granted, many open source packages place restrictions on this, such as "you must keep the copyright intact" or "your re-distributions must also include the source code" or "your re-distributions must be covered by the same open source license", etc.)

Commercial software that provides source code typically only lets you modify the code for your own internal use, and not to redistribute it.

If the commercial vendor goes out of business, or discontinues the product, you can continue to maintain it yourself -- but that may quickly become overwhelming to try to keep up with all of the needs of the industry while maintaining the software entirely by yourself. Since you can't redistribute it, you can't give it to anyone else who is interested. This eliminates the possibility of having a development community or a support community. (Support community would be possible, ONLY IF, you don't modify your source... otherwise, yours is different from everyone else's...)


dr2@xxxxxxxx wrote:

Nah, if I need source, get it up front and be done with it. Or find
another vendor. I've told more than one vendor nyet for refusing to
deliver current source.