27 Jul
2009
27 Jul
'09
4:19 p.m.
On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 13:34 -0400, laseray(a)gmail.com wrote:
Size of GPL code included is irrelevant.
True.
Inappropriate expectations. No license file was
included in distribution,
no text to indicate GPL. GPL violation #1.
Yes, but I'm willing to believe it was negligence.
These are excuses. Not buying it. A bunch of rubbish.
Assuming
your users are dumb is very impolite.
Assuming that your users would have trouble dealing with source code is
very different from assuming they are dumb.
You don't have to accept every suggestion. That is
fine. But my suggestions
which were actually real code were better than what you were doing. So the
refusal was quite illogical. My code was GPL, so no problem there. The
suggestions I made will make there way into the fork, then others will
wonder what the heck was Bob thinking to refuse these practical bug
fixes.
Maybe it's true, but you do sound very arrogant and pushy to me ;)
Again, irrelevant. Excuses, excuses. All over the
place. Stick to
the license, then there is no problem.
Sure. But it sounds like it was an honest mistake. Even if it wasn't
your aggressive tone doesn't help at all.
This contains some lies. The first message I received
from Bob had
an insulting tone to it, as if I was doing something wrong by asking for the
source. Nice attempt at back-paddling. Rubbish, throughout.
We all know how clear-cut tone in emails is ;p
What is anyone supposed to do with lots of hearsay, anyway?
If you want respect, give respect. Stop assuming you
are somehow in a better
position. It is very condescending.
I see a 50% chance you should apply those lines to yourself.
--
Thorsten Wilms
thorwil's design for free software:
http://thorwil.wordpress.com/