On 05/31/2010 04:46 AM, Peter Dolding wrote: > On 5/31/10, Gaveen Prabhasara <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Peter, >> >> Peter Dolding wrote: >> >> >>> [email protected] Fedora forbin list is only for items that status is 100 >>> percent sure to be legally doomed use it risk dieing inside days. Redhat >>> enterprise forbin list include suspect. Also its like other codecs and >>> times in the Fedora distributions where you require licenses to use that >>> do >>> not appear in redhat enterprise at all. >>> >>> >> Umm,... I'm not sure why my mail id is there. I'm guessing you meant >> me to pay some attention to the matter. So here's what I've got to say. >> >> I'm aware of the situation in Fedora and their position regarding Mono. >> I happen to stay close to Fedora matters, and in this matter I actually >> happen to agree their stance. >> >> If you ask me what's my stance about this matter with regards to >> MeeGo is, I happen to agree with what David Greaves said [1] on the >> other thread. There are many things to consider. However as a project >> we can't just casually ignore the concerns and hope for the best. While >> I'm also not a "rabid anti-Mono" person, I'm not particularly comfortable >> about the legal background either. >> >> The best part and one of the key points David mentions was about >> how to proceed with this matter. I'd like to request you to consider >> it too, specially as a person involved with FOSS project. :) Let me >> quote David here: >> "Maybe the most professional solution would be to continue to >> provide polite and reasonable responses to polite and reasonable >> questions? However tedious that may feel."[1] >> > That is the main thing I am after. Number one was the issue though > about if not we better now. If it means getting legal advice from > FSF and others. Prevention beats cure. > > I am not rabit anti-mono every time I ask for these legal side issues > to be addressed I must be anti-mono or a troll in mono people eyes.(I > get sick of it) Sorry I would love to be pro mono but not getting > legal answers blocks me. >
It is because of the way you throw accusations and badmouth Mono on a regular basis that you are considered a troll, not because you asked a question. David Greaves also asked a question, but I don't consider him a troll because he hasn't tried to sling mud like you keep doing (even in this very reply!). > If someone wants to use a copy acquired through direct supply paths > from Novell so covered by the MS Novell agreement I have no problems I > know the limitations of that agreement. > Did you not read any of the replies from myself or Miguel to your original question? It was *again* explained to you that the Microsoft Community Promise covers everyone, not just Novell. This has been explained to you before as well. And yet, here you are continuing to misconstrue facts. It's as if you ignore us when we answer your questions and then attack us saying we don't answer your questions. Pretty dishonest if you ask me... > Big thing I forgot to say I came to the mailing list in a hope of > getting a fast answer that everything was fine and intel or nokia had > it covered. This is the wrong mailing-list for that and you know that. If you want legal advice, a developer mailing-list is never the appropriate avenue for getting answers unless you want to start a flame war (I am remembering a certain flame war started on Ubuntu's mailing-lists by another BoycottNoveller over Mono that led to threats of people getting fired - you can read about it here: http://opensourcetogo.blogspot.com/2009/06/when-zeal-becomes-zealotry-tawdry-tale.html ). If the Microsoft Community Promise isn't enough for you, then how is all the other Free Software on MeeGo (or any other Linux distro) just fine and dandy without any sort of promise from Microsoft (or any other big tech company like Apple, etc) not to sue? The fact is that Mono has more protection than most other Free Software out there. Not only is there a legally binding promise from Microsoft, but also plenty of prior art (java, smalltalk, etc). > That way I could have cut of boycottnovel/techrights > doing bad PR about meego its not what a starting out project needs. > I did get the article delayed by 24 hours that the novell personal > spoted that little message of mine got a 24 hour delay. > So then you agree that BoycottNovell is waging a smear campaign? Smear first, don't even bother asking questions later? And you are here to save MeeGo from this smear campaign that BoycottNovell has already gone on about for at least 3 articles? How generous of you. What is this? Good cop, bad cop? > Defensive requires eyes in the locations that could fire off bad PR to > try to stop it before it happens where we can. Yes, like bad PR from your associates? > But to stop it I > need paperwork in order. Yes if I am anything I am an anti-troll. If > able I will make sure meego only gets good PR. > You are a bit late for that, your friends have already started their smear campaign (and started before you got any replies I might add). If you really want to help, you can start by discontinuing your mud-slinging efforts. Jeff _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
