![]() |
|
|
|
On 10/5/05, Renaud Deraison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Amazing. > I see, you like to use the open source community to test, patch, See, when I was talking about the "open source community," I was talking about one which, well, appreciates OPEN SOURCE. The "free" (for now) binary you talk about has little appeal to the community. > There was once was a time Tenable couldn't afford to write all I'm sure that has nothing to do with the fact that Tenable refuses to publish plugins developed under GPL when they have plans to develop them in house and can make money off a registered feed. How many people on this list have submitted plugins only to have them trumped by a registered feed plugin? You make a fair point about the improvment on the engine, but perhaps the open source community felt that their efforts were better placed at improving plugins. However, they may have taken a different point of view if they knew that that concentration would mean the loss of the O/S nature of the engine itself. Why not release Nessus3 open source under a new license that that excludes devices and appliances? _______________________________________________ Nessus mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.nessus.org/mailman/listinfo/nessus
|