Second draft of RFI response

[Evan Leibovitch]

Kyle O'Donnell wrote:
> Great Document.  Thanks for taking the time to write it.
>   

And thanks for the feedback!

> Q2 As stated above, we can demonstrate that free-proprietary software
> – while serving some useful purposes – is rarely useful in production
> environments. We are not aware of any legally acquired
> free-proprietary software that is useful for commercial production
> environments without requiring an upgrade to a paid version.
>
> I would leave this statement out, as it is speculative ("We are not
> aware"), and it may negatively influence someone's opinion on
> "free-proprietary software"
>   
Actually, I would deliberately like to infer that free-proprietary is
inherantly inferior to open source and is less honest than paid proprietary.
I actually held back the oft-used drug-pusher analogy -- "the first hit
is free" -- though it was tempting to use. I'll see what I can do to
make it less strident.

> Q2.1 typo:
> ... if high quality Canadian SSERVICE providers are prepared to support it.
>   
will fix.

> Q3.8 Is the software included in the repositories of major Linux distributions?
> I would change 'Linux' to 'open source operating systems' maybe add
> 'such as Linux'.
>   
Good point. will fix.

- Evan
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists