On Wed, 3 Aug 2011 21:51:03 -0300 Diego Saravia <[email protected]> wrote:
> > While projects like linux-libre and icecat are not the legal > > copyright holder of the source isn't relevant to us; the licence > > they are distributed under gives us the permission we need. (No one > > entity holds all the copyright to Linux either). > > yes, nobody says that you dont have the right to distribute. > > the point is that what you distribute are not: "the sources" > > > Saying we don't have source code because we are not the originator > > of the project is a logical fallacy. > > I am not speaking about "have", con can get the real sources, from > original project. > > > > Not sure what you were getting at there. > > the true. Maybe, but I'm certainly not able to find it in your comments - perhaps there is simply misunderstanding involved. Personally, I'm not interested in pursuing this any further, as history suggests we won't come to an agreement :) thanks, kk -- Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS) Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer http://www.kgoetz.id.au No, I won't join your social networking group
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
