<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Parsec going Open Source</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.linuxgames.com/archives/6167/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.linuxgames.com/archives/6167</link>
	<description>Embrace your Inner Penguin</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Jun 2013 12:01:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: cburke</title>
		<link>http://www.linuxgames.com/archives/6167/comment-page-1#comment-17741</link>
		<dc:creator>cburke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jan 2003 19:11:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-17741</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Though I have to wonder why it wasn&#039;t open source from the get-go.  Were they hoping they could ape Counter Strike and get bought?  Counter Strike is certainly the exception there.  Maybe they were worried about cheaters?  Not that it helped Counter Strike. :)

As to the license, I hope it&#039;s re-using an existing license:  GPL, LGPL, BSD, etc, just because the world doesn&#039;t need another half-assed attempt at an open-source license.  The choice of which one to use would basically depend on the degree to which they want people to be able to take their code and make proprietary stuff out of it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Though I have to wonder why it wasn&#8217;t open source from the get-go.  Were they hoping they could ape Counter Strike and get bought?  Counter Strike is certainly the exception there.  Maybe they were worried about cheaters?  Not that it helped Counter Strike. :)</p>
<p>As to the license, I hope it&#8217;s re-using an existing license:  GPL, LGPL, BSD, etc, just because the world doesn&#8217;t need another half-assed attempt at an open-source license.  The choice of which one to use would basically depend on the degree to which they want people to be able to take their code and make proprietary stuff out of it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: </title>
		<link>http://www.linuxgames.com/archives/6167/comment-page-1#comment-17720</link>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jan 2003 11:01:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-17720</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Id like to have more information on the license they are going to choose... cause opensourcing is great, but it means that developpers willing to work on parsec will have to go in the same direction... would be better to be totally free so that anyone can start a fork...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Id like to have more information on the license they are going to choose&#8230; cause opensourcing is great, but it means that developpers willing to work on parsec will have to go in the same direction&#8230; would be better to be totally free so that anyone can start a fork&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
