[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-promo
Subject:    Re: [kde-promo] Re: [Important] When talking about Aegypten or Kroupware
From:       Andreas Pour <pour () mieterra ! com>
Date:       2003-01-31 21:33:37
[Download RAW message or body]


Hi,

I think this may be a translation issue.  In English, there is no such
difference.

In English, governments "fund" things.  For example, they fund highway
construction.  Nobody thinks this means, they pay a contractor whether the job
is done or not.  Everyone knows there are contracts involved and payment is made
only when the job is completed, subject of course to progress payments.

Also, a contract also does not mean what you imply.  A contract does not mean
that you are paid only if the job is completed.  For example, there are many
types of contracts - such as futures or options - that have nothing to do with
anything being completed.  Other contracts - e.g., many software contracts are
based on an hourly rate and do not specify anything in particular get done but
just that you spend some time doing stuff.

So let's not get religious about this and annoy CNet.  I think they did a great
story and I don't think their reward should be getting "corrected".  I think
that only lessens the odds that they do another story.   Save your criticism for
really important matters :-).

Ciao,

Dre

Ralf Nolden wrote:
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Freitag, 31. Januar 2003 12:51, Marc Mutz wrote:
> > ... please _don't_ use the word "sponsor", "fund" or anything like that
> > in connection with the BSI and these projects in general.
> > 
> > The correct term is "contract". This is important! Here's why:
> 
> I have to agree 100% with Marc. I'm working for credativ (www.credativ.de)
> since last September and we are *contracted* by the BSI to install KDE 3.1
> together with Aegypten on their PC's.
> 
> I think that makes perfectly cear how this is working: *contract* companies to
> develop the software and then *contract* companies to install the developed
> software.
> 
> Both parts are paid, contracted work and should be declared as such. The only
> thing that free software projects gain is that the contracts specify the
> modifications to be done generally by the requirements that the offices have
> and not what anyone else may have on requirements. If you are a company and
> have requirements to certain specific modifications on KDE, contract
> companies who are working together with free software projects so the results
> of your contracted work will be reusable by the projects and this in turn
> protect your investment as later versions of the project's software don't
> need to be adapted again to fit your requirements. Then either order your IT
> staff to install the contracted work or contact other companies (like
> credativ) to install it according to your requirements as a customer.
> 
> This has *never* anything to do with "we want to support free software". The
> fact that it appears as such is just a positive side-effect, never the
> original intention. This may serve other companies as an example who need
> their own modifications on KDE also but already understood that any work
> you're doing in a fork will be completely useless as soon as a new KDE
> version appears, so contracting companies that know how free software works
> and are actively taking part in the projects is your protection of
> investment.
> 
> Ralf
 
_______________________________________________
This message is from the kde-promo mailing list.

Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-promo to unsubscribe, set digest on or \
temporarily stop your subscription.


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]