27 Apr
2005
27 Apr
'05
11:12 a.m.
Alfons Adriaensen wrote:
I suppose that's true, but it'd be a bit rude! And if you re-write
something so completely, there'd not be much point in taking their stuff
in the first place!
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 11:33:02AM +0100, Julian Storer
wrote:
ok, apology accepted.
Alfons: I expect an apology for your comment.
I'm very rarely annoyed by
things that people post on forums, but you've misunderstood a passing
comment I made, and extrapolated it to suggest that I'm some kind of thief.
All I meant was that on the couple of occasions when people (friends of
mine, in fact) have *voluntarily* contributed code to my project, I
ended up restructuring it because I didn't like the their coding style.
I don't steal code, and don't expect to be randomly accused of doing so
by people who know nothing about me.
Jules,
I did not suggest that you were doing anything illegal, and as long as
what you do is legal, you certainly are not a thief.
But I do apologize, since the formulation of my comment did indeed leave
room for it to be interpreted in the way you do. And, as you write, I do
not know you and should have given you at least the benefit of doubt.
What I still do find disturbing is that you claim your
project to be GPL-ed.
The dual license scheme effectively allows any user to buy him/herself
out of his/her obligations under the GPL. The GPL itself does not AFAIK
allow for such a buy-out, so as far as I can see it just doesn't apply.
if you own the copyright to something, you can release it under as many
licenses as you like..
... So if you
want to contribute, you'd need to be happy about me taking
over the copyright of any stuff you send me.
I don't see the point. If you completely rewrite it - for whatever reason -
the copyright on the new version is yours anyway. I don't have to be happy
about it.