Re: [LAD] Impro-Visor created on sourceforge

On Saturday 08 August 2009 14:25:37 you wrote:
> On 08/09/2009 04:27 AM, Raymond Martin wrote:
> > On Saturday 08 August 2009 14:06:52 you wrote:
> >> On 08/09/2009 03:36 AM, Raymond Martin wrote:
> >>> Yes this would apply for the commercial product against any others that
> >>> are sold. It won't apply against free software because nothing is sold.
> >>
> >> Does it really matter? Do you really need to keep the name? If your fork
> >> of the project continues active development while the institute
> >> continues to develop their version then there will definitely be
> >> confused users at some point down the line.
> >
> > There is no fork. I am wondering how many times do I have to write that.
>
> I think you may have confused the issue by stating at the very start of
> this set of thread that you were going to fork the project and that you
> had reverse engineered the binaries.

I would have to look back to see if I actually wrote "fork the project"
or if I wrote fork Impro-Visor. In any case, it is the application that
is important, not the idea of a project.

> > There is no fork, it does not exist. There is only a project with
> > a similar name, and packages of the original version, no forked program,
> > no forked code, nada. Except I did make a couple of minor changes in the
> > Impro-Visor packages I put up. Those were just to make it better for
> > others so they would not end up violating the GPL.
>
> Sorry but how exactly is this different from a fork? Is there a guide
> that you have read somewhere that explains the exact steps required for
> making a fork? Why have you now decided that you are not actually
> forking the project when you originally declared that was the intended
> result of your efforts?

A fork of an application is an application. What else could it be?

All I am saying, very clearly I might add, is that there is no application
that could be considered a fork and that is what all the discussions
are about.

> > I guess that was selfish.
>
> You are putting the words in your own mouth here. There's no need to
> suggest this even as a joke. I certainly haven't suggested it is the case.
>

I better not use sarcasm, only others are allowed to do that to me.

Raymond

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Sun Aug 9 00:15:04 2009