25 Jul
2009
25 Jul
'09
5:53 p.m.
laseray(a)gmail.com wrote:
Same #gnu
We will see how it goes. For myself I wait to see how Bob acts in the
coming time.
I'm happy though that more people seems to have interest in this project.
Regards,
\r
On Saturday 25 July 2009 15:04:05 Grammostola Rosea
wrote:
I asked this on #gnu , they told me, it is not necessary
laseray(a)gmail.com wrote:
Yes you do. This has been explained previously.
On Saturday 25 July 2009 14:09:26 you wrote:
The guy removed the preview version from his website.
You don't have to release the source of development versions.
While you have every right to fork the code, one
quibble I have (most
likely just with your wording) is where you say that they are
obligated to provide the binary. They have no such obligation
whatsoever. If they provide a binary they are obligated to provide
source, but they are free to offer neither without violating the GPL.
Okay, it was just a quick wording, so don't misconstrue my meaning.
The binaries were out, under GPL, source has to be available
then in accord with the license. That is what this is about.
You don't have to make your source available,
but people who gets your
binaries should be able to get the source too.
Yes you do. Depends on how you use the license. This also was established
previously.
Mmhh I'd rather saw a better corporation
here. I don't know who is
non-coorporative here though, Raymond or Bob Keller.
Bob. Do not equate packaging with contents. This seems to be
the practical misunderstanding you are having.
Maybe it would be good to invite Bob Keller for
a reasonable
dialogue on this list. I like to hear his opinion about corporation.
After such a public discussion we can decide whether there are good
reasons to bundle forces on _his_ project or to fork it.
my 2 cents,
There you go again giving that guy the benefit of the doubt, even after
he had a number of chances to act reasonably.
In my last email to him I suggested we discuss this matter on his Yahoo
group with others (court of public opinion), but I know he will never do that
(which I directly mentioned to him).
He will never allow free discussion of this point so that people can come to a
consensus. As I already stated, a few people sided with him initially and then
reversed their positions once they actually had the facts. Despite this he
does not seem to be able to reason the whole thing out to its logical
conclusion.
In any event, I already have a project now and can do what I like in accord
with the GPL. So there is no "we" to really decide anything. I already made
the decision and will move forward. Others are free to do as they wish, also
in accord with the GPL. If you want to participate on my project, fine.
I will hook you up. If you want to make your own, also fine. Fork my stuff,
when I put it up, I encourage it. Forks don't hurt a project they help to
create that FOSS eco-system we are all happy to use. More versions will
encourage better development. Do as you will and I will even help you out if
you want to fork within my project, have separate branches of development,
etc.