On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 07:36:21AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> On 22 May 2002, at 22:45, Richard Zidlicky wrote:
> 
> > > That is the way I personally see it.
> > 
> > than why do say in another email that you consider paying developpers
> > royalties? I can't follow your logic.
> > 
> 
> Well, then let me help you a little bit, then.
> The fact that I PERSONALLY see thing in some way doesn't mean 
> that:
> - others will see it that way
> - I should impose my point of view on everybody else.
> 
> Again, I personally will NEVER charge money for anything that I 
> may happen to develop (if any). I would like others to adopt the 
> same attitude. 
> 
> BUT if somebody has developped something wonderful, sends it to 
> me for inlusion but oinly if money is given to him for every copy, 
> should I then exclude it just becuase of that?

how big is the chance it couldn't be done as loadable module
equally well? Technically you should understand that the only 
people who absolutely can't provide their code as loadable
extension are the HW developpers (Nasta's proposal is a nice
step in this direction but so far purely theoretical). If 
there *has* to be initialisation of MMU or some strange HW
before the basic OS can be initialised than there is absolutely 
no way you could lrespr it later. HW developpers simply have to 
work with your license - and they will hardly require royalties 
for their own code running on their own machines.

Those writing fancy modules (say ISO filesystem for CD) have
all possibilities to package it as a nice module and sell
separately.
I wouldn't even mind if it was sold with SMSQ together as long as 
 - the user has the choice
 - it is clear that this extension is not part of SMSQ, does
   not fall under this licence and will not taint SMSQ copyright 
   in any way.
 
> I think not.
> 
> I HOPE the situation will not arise. I can't be sure 

that is a completely hopeless argument, similar to our disagreement
about inclusion of code with restriction on source distribution. 
The mere possibility that this could happen will turn away some 
developpers. You will taint SMSQ copyright if it happens.

Richard


Reply via email to