[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-licensing
Subject:    Re: QT Designer _NOT_ under QPL.
From:       Joseph Carter <knghtbrd () debian ! org>
Date:       2000-08-20 21:36:58
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, Aug 18, 2000 at 03:51:38PM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> 3- You haven't responded to my point 2, which RMS said on this
>    mailing list yesterday was a bad idea.

Peter, he's NOT GOING TO respond to that point.  His whole argument now
seems to hinge on RMS accepting implicit permission as legal.  RMS saying
that such implicit permission is difficult to rely on and all together a
bad plan bursts his bubble nicely and for the sake of consistancy on his
part (and because he's done a damned effective job trolling you along) he
has no choice but to ignore or downplay that point as much as possible.
To do otherwise would end the argument and not in a way that is favorable
to him since he'd be in the unfortunate position of attacking the opinion
he has used as his defense.

Give it a rest, eesh!

-- 
Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org>               GnuPG key 1024D/DCF9DAB3
Debian GNU/Linux (http://www.debian.org/)         20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC
The QuakeForge Project (http://quakeforge.net/)   44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3

Perhaps Debian is concerned more about technical excellence rather than
ease of use by breaking software. In the former we may excel.  In the
latter we have to concede the field to Microsoft. Guess where I want to go
today?
        -- Manoj Srivastava

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]