--- In ib-support@y..., "Ann W. Harrison" <aharrison@i...> wrote:

> ... I'm curious to know whether the product was actually that solid

before they went into testing, or when the changes will be checked
into the tree.

Well Ann, don't you think their intent is to *never* commit them to
the tree (except for occasional insignificant issues) ? I do.

Reading again the press release and the info on their site, the whole
idea I get is clear : there is some source code on SourceForge which
is the "open-source" version. Very well. Based on that code, they now
develop a commercial product, with licensing code in it, and so on.
And that's another thing. I suppose the intent is less to generously
update the source code on SourceForge with their new developments
(the day there will be such...) than keep an eye on the developments
the open-source community provide to include them in their commercial
build.

But all of this is damned stupid-gaming on the license edge, I fear.

Except if the IPL (modified MPL) gives the specific right to the
initial developer (Borland) to do else, if they MODIFY any of the
source code published on SourceForge, they MUST provide that modified
code. Well, I have no time to lose re-reading the IPL again, but I'm
quite sure some sentences have been written very specifically to
allow them to do what they do today.

Olivier Mascia.