On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Jose Gonzalez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This issue is a long and complex one, and I really have no desire to > get into the specifics of it. You and Nathan and Carsten and maybe many > others, > may feel comfortable with your decisions and choices, and that's fine with > me :) I just happen not to share in this view and have made my own decision.
Well, I wasn't going to feed the trolls, but since you called me out... I wasn't involved in the choice of licenses for E, but it was one of the things that attracted me to start using and developing for it. I chose the license for EWL to match the project and I don't have any regrets about doing so. As for your comments about this style of license being detrimental to the community, I haven't seen any justification for this concern. There are plenty of projects out there with similar licenses that are broadly adopted and supported, many of which have thriving communities. Don't forget that the Apache License is in a similar vein to BSD and MIT. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
