I don't want to be the one saying it, but; chill down the tone, please. It is not aimed at anyone participating in the discussion, but I do beleive it's a storm in a teacup as Jeff says. Although, there must also be an understanding that the GPL and the copyright assignment aren't unrelated as such, since Novell will release the transfered software under the GPL _and_ any licence they wish. I understand that it's a problem to contribute to something when one wants to keep ones code out of proprietary territory. This doesn't nescessarily go against Novell, or Evolution, but it's just a fact that someone wants it one way, and someone wants it the other. So you have a choice: Contribute, or don't. If there is sufficient pressuer or loss of developer base, maybe Novell will accept further limiting clauses to the transfer - or maybe they won't. That is a decision on their part, not ours. People have all their right to say what they mean, but I expect people to respect contrary opinions. In the end, Evolution is Free Software, and released under the GPL. That means it should not be kept out of the Desktop, IMO. But in the end, I do believe it's up to the Release Team, that is a part of our representative democracy, to decide what is right to include and what's not. Someone will dislike the decision, but there's no way to please everyone in this matter. With this, I close this discussion from my end. Hopefully, we can accept the fact that disagreements always will exist, and close down the discussion as a whole. Christoffer fre, 06.08.2004 kl. 20.11 +0100, skrev Rui Miguel Seabra: > On Fri, 2004-08-06 at 11:58 -0700, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > <quote who="Rui Miguel Seabra"> > > > It's supposed to be GPL, not GPL, or anything else. > > > > > So you consider acceptable to include as an official module one with a > > > licensing scheme created with the purpose of circunventing the GPL? > > > > I am not convinced you understand the discussion or issues at hand. > > And I reject your dismissiveness. > > > You seem > > to think copyright assignment and the GPL are somehow related. They are not. > > But one can be, and is, used with the intention of cirunventing the > other. > > > Perhaps you should refrain from posting until you have some context on what > > we are discussing here. > > Perhaps you should refrain your blind trust and use an analytical > insight. Instead of a problem in need of solving, you react as if my > intention was attacking a project (that I love to use) and its > developers. > > Rui > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list gnome org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dette er en digitalt signert meldingsdel