samba license change
rc040203 at freenet.de
Wed Oct 10 13:52:19 UTC 2007
On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 08:30 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 12:20 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 11:51 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > > Le Mer 10 octobre 2007 07:10, Ralf Corsepius a écrit :
> > >
> > > > Well, it matters very much to individuals if they want to endanger
> > > > themselves by the uncertainties of a "brand new" license a political
> > > > organization with controversial (some say "fundamentalist zealotic")
> > > > attitude (the FSF) tries to enforce.
> > >
> > > Then don't link to GPLv3 code. Simple. Easy.
> > False - This is not easy.
> > > Don't ask for the freedom to make licensing choices then deny it to
> > > other projects because they happen to make a different choice than
> > > yours (and incidentally they've been involved in actual trials which
> > > are likely to be more relevant to them than your anti-FSF paranoïa)
> > I prefer to rely on existing precedences which had been approved by
> > courts, and not a political party's wishful thinking.
> Simply put, can you stop trolling?
Welcome, several 100s of pages explaing to GPLv2's role in the light of
German laws written by German lawyers are sufficient reasons for me not
to consider GPLv3 at the moment
> This is not an anti-GPLv3 trollfest, we have real things to discuss.
> You are just distracting with irrelevant trolling arguments.
Thanks. May each project chose that license they want for whatever
reasons they want.
More information about the fedora-devel-list