On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:30:04 -0500 "Nathan Ingersoll" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> babbled:
> 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. i agree. :) -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
