On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 18:09 +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > On Llu, 2004-08-02 at 18:18, Rui Miguel Seabra wrote: > > Not true. Companies can't forbid what an Evolution developer does with > > his free time unless what they develop might interfere with an Anti- > > In some countries they certainly can. I have a hard time believing that there are "civilized" countries where such power would be limitless like that, but then, the only free-world out there is out of this world :| > I don't see it as a big problem for two reasons > > 1. Providing the Evolution name is not locked away in a fashion we > cannot keep using it the gnome userbase can always fork evolution > > 2. Old evolution code clearly contains pieces of things like gweather > that do not appear to have ever been assigned to anyone. Those portions could be cut out, I guess they're not very important. However, the problem is that it seems to me that almost all of the core programmers are employed by Novell. Rui -- + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...? Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments. See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part