Re: [LAD] Impro-Visor packages now on SF

On Saturday 25 July 2009 15:53:01 Grammostola Rosea wrote:
> >>...
> >> The guy removed the preview version from his website.
> >> You don't have to release the source of development versions.
> >
> > Yes you do. This has been explained previously.
>
> I asked this on #gnu , they told me, it is not necessary

I do not know where these people get there info but it cannot be
the GPL. Thus you have more people that cannot read the GPL properly.
Go to the FSF and read the FAQ, not #gnu. Read the GPL.

There is no language in the GPL that EVER indicates some difference
between a release/stable (or whatever) and a development version.
Show it to me. You cannot find any language like that because all
FOSS under GPL can be consider in a constant state of development!

> >> You don't have to make your source available, but people who gets your
> >> binaries should be able to get the source too.
> >
> > Yes you do. Depends on how you use the license. This also was established
> > previously.
>
> Same #gnu

Similar to above.

>
> >> Mmhh I'd rather saw a better corporation here. I don't know who is
> >> non-coorporative here though, Raymond or Bob Keller.
> >
> > Bob. Do not equate packaging with contents. This seems to be
> > the practical misunderstanding you are having.
> >
> >> Maybe it would be good to invite Bob Keller for a reasonable
> >> dialogue on this list. I like to hear his opinion about corporation.
> >> After such a public discussion we can decide whether there are good
> >> reasons to bundle forces on _his_ project or to fork it.
> >>
> >> my 2 cents,
> >
> > There you go again giving that guy the benefit of the doubt, even after
> > he had a number of chances to act reasonably.
> >
> > In my last email to him I suggested we discuss this matter on his Yahoo
> > group with others (court of public opinion), but I know he will never do
> > that (which I directly mentioned to him).
> >
> > He will never allow free discussion of this point so that people can come
> > to a consensus. As I already stated, a few people sided with him
> > initially and then reversed their positions once they actually had the
> > facts. Despite this he does not seem to be able to reason the whole thing
> > out to its logical conclusion.
> >
> > In any event, I already have a project now and can do what I like in
> > accord with the GPL. So there is no "we" to really decide anything. I
> > already made the decision and will move forward. Others are free to do as
> > they wish, also in accord with the GPL. If you want to participate on my
> > project, fine. I will hook you up. If you want to make your own, also
> > fine. Fork my stuff, when I put it up, I encourage it. Forks don't hurt a
> > project they help to create that FOSS eco-system we are all happy to use.
> > More versions will encourage better development. Do as you will and I
> > will even help you out if you want to fork within my project, have
> > separate branches of development, etc.
>
> We will see how it goes. For myself I wait to see how Bob acts in the
> coming time.
> I'm happy though that more people seems to have interest in this project.

Suit yourself. More interest can lead to improvements and that is what counts
for the end user.

Raymond

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Sun Jul 26 00:15:05 2009