Subject: Re: [Netatalk-devel] Re: Another reason to go GPL
From: Bruce A. Burdick, Jr. (bucky@interaccess.com)
Date: Wed Mar 28 2001 - 14:58:31 EST
> From: Matthew Keller <kellermg@potsdam.edu>
> Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 12:01:00 -0500
>
>> Sorry, Matthew, for posting again on this. I'll now drop it, as you
>> asked.
>
> I never asked for this issue to be dropped - We **NEED** to discuss
> this. We **NEED** for everyone, pro/con/neutral, to not only understand the
> differences between these licenses, but understand the ramifications of any
> change as it pertains to Netatalk. I will NEVER ask you to drop it- I may
> correct your misstatements or misunderstandings to prevent the spread of
> FUD, but I'll never ask you to cease (and if I did/do, you have my
> permission to slap me :)
My fault. Bad choice of words. I misinterpreted you: I thought you were
implying that the discussion had raged and ended on devel list.
Your points have been well-taken. And as you are a principal player in
netatalk's development, you _must_ have much more say than I (a gregarious
user of netatalk), and _your_ desires must be reflected in the license you
all choose. And I have to admit that your stated desires are better
accommodated by the GPL. I was directing my comments toward the foundations
of those desires. I was also concerned, given the comments of others, that
the GPL was going to be adopted in Grand Lemming Style (i.e. because
"everyone else is doing it"). You have obviously thought about what the
license decision will mean to you. In my view, only those who have done that
mental work should determine what license you (collectively, now) choose.
For those of you have done that I hope you will be able (or have been able)
to persuade any stragglers to properly weigh these considerations. I'm glad
we agree that this is an important issue.
-B...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Oct 14 2001 - 03:04:36 EDT