This is source-code in view mode; [Up]
Date: Sun 10-Feb-1989 23:14:23 From: Unknown Subject: source code I can think of one really good reason NOT to distribute the source code that has nothing to do with NeXT being stingy. Right now, if you write a program for UNIX you have to take into account the fact that it might have berkely extensions. or sun extensions... or somebodies real time extensions. and it might run News. or it might run X11. or it might not. You can't really PLAN on anything. This makes your UNIX code about as far from portable as possible on a "portable" operating system. Maybe NeXT just wants to make sure the environment doesn't change every time you sneeze... >From: gary@x-sphinx.uchicago.edu (Gary Buchholz)
Date: Sun 02-Mar-1989 06:48:48 From: Unknown Subject: Re: source code I was once under the impression that access to source code is purely company policy. Then I started hearing that it is not so much that, but in most cases, it is with the finacial backing structure of the company. In some cases, the insurance company backing them is the one that mandates no source code. Sometimes, in special cases, a company can make a source holder a consultant (ie pay them some token amount per year) which will allow the company to give out source. By in large, a company can't do this with everybody wanting source. Any legal experts care to get into this? scarter@caip.rutgers.edu >From: mike@shogun.cc.umich.edu (Michael Nowak)
These are the contents of the former NiCE NeXT User Group NeXTSTEP/OpenStep software archive, currently hosted by Marcel Waldvogel and Netfuture.ch.