[Calmer now] Open source is fantastic. It is a stunningly efficient and elegant way to create software. I love open source. What I don't love is the notion tha

[Calmer now] Open source is fantastic. It is a stunningly efficient and elegant way to create software. I love open source. What I don't love is the notion that either all software should be free (gratis) à la Stallman, or the less extreme view that you can make money from it as long as you do so in a very inefficient and non-scalable manner (basically charging for support). Also, I find it quite ironic that some people describe (with a straight face) the supply of proprietary extensions to open source code as an 'open source business model'. That's akin to funding a peace march with the proceeds from arms sales. And whilst I have lots of respect for what the community has achieved, and the people who helped make it happen (including Stallman and Raymond) I would argue that there is no inherent conflict between open source ideals and the notion that some users should pay for the code. If a developer wants to give his code away for free, then that's his or her choice and I respect that. But if another developer decided that his code is not free for commercial use, then I respect that position as well. I hold the view that a low-friction and equitable licensing system for open source software would have a further galvanizing effect on this already vibrant sector. DS