![]() Argey ( talk) 04:34, 23 August 2010 (UTC) Reply Info on XMind Ltd. For licensees that wish to distribute XMind 3, modify the source code, and/or build extensions, the EPL can be used to maintain copyleft of the original code base while encouraging innovation with commercial and other open source offerings incorporating XMind." (Retrieved Aug 23, 2010) Presumably the Pro version contains proprietary code, and that code is not open source, but I can't see any objection to the claim of open source for the free version. contribs) 10:05, 22 August 2010 (UTC) Reply This page says: "XMind is dual licensed under 2 open source licenses: the Eclipse Public License v1.0 (EPL), which is available at, and the GNU Lesser General Public License v3 (LGPL), which is available at.how can it be open source? -Preceding unsigned comment added by 1c33圓7 ( talk This software has 2 versions : free and commercial. Argey ( talk) 06:34, 28 October 2010 (UTC) Reply XMIND or XMind I see that it has now appeared in PCWorld under "Productivity Software: Best of 2010", so I have added this reference and am about to remove the template questioning notability. But the article did not make the case from secondary sources, and another editor rightly added the notability template back again. It has since established itself as one of the leading mind map software packages, and I know it has downloads in the millions. ![]() Three years ago (almost to the day, see above) I questioned the notability of this software. I question XMIND being real open-source, to build xmind, a number of pre-compiled libraries from a binary xmind distribution is needed. Stephen -Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephen0928 ( talk One links to a website built by a mind mapping software expert-Chuck Frey. One links to the official forum about XMIND. Much easier usage than any other applications, even though this is a new entry.īTW, XMIND has garnered "The best 100 products of 2007" from PC World China. I don't think this page should be deleted! XMIND is a great mind mapping software. One in the head is reasonable, but more (two more at the foot) makes it look like spam.Īrgey 07:44, 29 October 2007 (UTC) Reply ![]() I also removed the multiple links to the XMIND site. ![]() Substantial coverage in reliable sources constitutes such objective evidence, as do published peer recognition and the other factors listed in the subject specific guidelines."Īrgey 07:37, 29 October 2007 (UTC) Reply I previously marked this when the article was under "Xmind" here: but by a redirection, that talk page was separated from the article, and the "notable" tag disappeared, with no attempt to meet the gudelines for notability.īefore removing the tag from this page again, I ask that editors please read and ensure that the article is justified by "verifiable objective evidence to support a claim of notability. That software like MindManager is noteable is without doubt, and some others among the 80 meet the criteria for notability, but why does this one? I have marked this as requiring justification as a Wikipedia entry because no evidence is given in the article that XMIND is more noteable than any of the 80 or so other mind mapping software products. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |