[GEM Development] version of opengem for easy use for windows users

[Lyrical Nanoha]

On Fri, 12 May 2006, veganalex wrote:

> On 12/05/06, Blair Campbell <blairdude at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Not impressed at /all./ I'd go with DR-DOS like a shot myself. Also
>> > open, also GPL, current and supported and being actively developed.
>> 
>> DR-DOS is definitely NOT GPL, and has a semi open licence; it can only
>> be used for personal use, and to my best knowledge only the kernel and
>> command.com source is available.  If DR-DOS was GPL, then FreeDOS
>> would probably not exist.
>
> wait a second, if it's free for personal use, then can't almost anyone
> use it? - and can't people then upgrade / update dr-dos and then
> distribute it saying that businesses have to pay license fee to
> whoever owns dr-dos or whatever...???
>
> veganalex

1. That's still not open source.
2. Yes, and it's being done.

-uso.