It is boilerplate to state unequivocally that NO Open Source company
has a successful business model? (Or in Microsoft's case that NO
Closed-Source company has a successful business model?)
Why did RH feel the need to make any statement whatsoever about
their fellow Open Source companies? That is hardly "boilerplate"
stuff, it sounds more like editorial content.
Question stands, "who wrote that awful tripe"?
:-) Doc
> Nah, it's really pretty standard stuff for stock-related releases. If
> you look at virtually any tech IPO documentation it'll contain something
> similar to the following. It's all part of the "full disclosure" stuff
> you have to do when you're a public company. Microsoft probably has a
> bit in their stock reports that says something similar, only without
> reference to open-source software.
>
> It's boilerplate legal mumbo-jumbo and nothing to get worked up about.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 17:22:57 EDT