[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: luaproc
- From: Mark Meijer <meijer78@...>
- Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 22:42:05 +0100
2009/2/20 Mike Schmitz <email@example.com>:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 03:16:16PM +0100, Mark Meijer wrote:
>> On a side note, and not to be picky (I do hope the answer to my
>> question is yes in this particular case), but is GPL-ed software even
>> allowed to have that GPL license removed and replaced by a different
> I for one am sick and tired of hearing all the GPL bashing. Please
> educate yourself.
And I'm sick of people taking any comment I make that smells mildly
critical as a personal insult, upon which I have to apologize and
explain my intentions so farging careful so as to not step on any more
toes. So I won't do that this time, I've had my quotum for today (not
on this list).
First of all I'm not bashing GPL, in fact I'm immensely thankful for
its existence and what it represents. I have no interest in bashing
any open source license or undermining any open source development
Second, I thought there perhaps just might be some legal issues for
the authors of luaproc when they announced having changed from a GPL
to MIT license. I guessed there was probably no reason to worry,
nevertheless I was trying to be helpful and put my concern about this
on the table, by simply asking. I figured that would be preferable to
waiting for some legal eagle to take advantage of a possible
oversight, which is all to easily made.
If that's too much for you to take, then tough MIT, bub.
And FAQ you too.