On Tue, 21 May 2002, Roy Wood wrote: > This is a different issue. If your non-commercial developers don't want > to work under the licence that is their problem, not yours. As a
One small point. If ANY developer, commercial, private or otherwise, decides not to do work they might otherwise do for SMSQ, it is my problem, your problem, and a problem for everyone in the entire SMSQ-using community who is deprived of that contribution. > I have done for the last six years. We have no commitment to non > commercial developers because they are, by definition, not part of the > commercial scene. Under this license, there are no commercial developers - everone has to do it for free. You have no commitment to any developer? I don't think you mean that - do you? I'm not criticising, just confused because the words don't say what I believe you were trying to say. Please could you restate this? Thanks Dave
