On Thursday, January 27, 2011 04:23:53 pm Christopher Cherrett did opine: > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [LAD] [LAU] OpenOctaveMidi2 (OOM2) beta release > From: gene heskett <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Date: 01/27/2011 02:07 PM > > > On Thursday, January 27, 2011 04:02:20 pm Christopher Cherrett did opine: > >> -------- Original Message -------- > >> Subject: Re: [LAD] [LAU] OpenOctaveMidi2 (OOM2) beta release > >> From: gene heskett<[email protected]> > >> To: [email protected] > >> Date: 01/27/2011 01:57 PM > >> > >>> On Thursday, January 27, 2011 03:43:40 pm Chris Cannam did opine: > >>>> On 27 January 2011 19:38, Christopher > >>>> Cherrett<[email protected]> > >>> > >>> wrote: > >>>>> I suspect there is much more to this puzzle than attribution. > >>>> > >>>> No, really not. Attribution is incredibly important to many open > >>>> source developers, partly because there are so few tangible > >>>> benefits involved with open source work, and partly because the > >>>> force of the licenses we use (particularly the GPL) depends on > >>>> being confident about the ownership of copyright. It matters a > >>>> great deal to people if you take someone's work and represent it > >>>> as your own. > >>>> > >>>> And it's a pity, because a situation like this or the earlier > >>>> Rosegarden fork ought to be beneficial to everybody. With > >>>> Rosegarden, your project's focus was different from that of any of > >>>> our core developers and, although we like to keep people happy, we > >>>> really weren't able to spend the time to do the things you wanted. > >>>> Forking ensured that people who liked things "your way" had > >>>> somewhere else to go, which made things better for them and simpler > >>>> for us. > >>>> > >>>> In light of that, it's a great shame that the resulting new project > >>>> should then give us such a sour impression -- and the same thing is > >>>> true again here. Your casual attitude to other people's work means > >>>> that I and probably many others would avoid working with you again, > >>>> but that negative feeling could have been avoided with such a tiny > >>>> amount of thought and even less work. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Chris > >>> > >>> +1000 > >>> > >>> This very well said, Chris. I personally do not have a dog in this > >>> fight, but had that been some of my now elderly code, I think I > >>> would be justified in calling this new effort out, as has now been > >>> more than amply done by others here, and the point _has_ been made. > >>> Unfortunately, I am probably doing little except contributing to > >>> the roar of disapproval by the crowd.:( > >>> > >>> To Alex and your crew: > >>> > >>> It is likely that this contretemps will not fully settle until such > >>> time as the proper attributions have been restored and a new release > >>> containing those attributions has been made. > >>> > >>> Defensive attitudes do not cut it, performance does. > >> > >> A new release? What exactly do you expect? > > > > The correct attributions, possibly with a sentence or 2 describing how > > the fork came to be in the README in download able package. What, 10 > > minutes work plus the repacking? > > Reasonable. > > We just have git so less than 10 minutes :)
Chuckle. -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) <http://tinyurl.com/ddg5bz> Mountain Dew and doughnuts... because breakfast is the most important meal of the day. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
