--- Russell Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/28/06, Bill Hibbard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > By open source distribution you are expressing > optimism > > about human nature, and your developer community > will > > mostly justify that optimism. The best approach > for the > > few who disappoint you is to simply ignore them. > > > I agree. When I suggested a "no incompatible > versions" clause in the > license, I wasn't thinking in terms of "then you can > fight and win lots of > court cases!"; Linus Torvalds, Guido van Rossum et > al haven't had to do that > after all. I think that, as in the case of the GPL, > most people would > respect the terms of the license without having to > be coerced; and I agree > that the first line of defense against incompatible > forking is to design the > architecture such that incompatible forks aren't > needed. > > (This is different from the question of "what if > [insert favorite bad guys] > use it for nefarious purposes". I still think the > only way to guarantee that > doesn't happen is to never let any copies of the > code out of your grasp.) Thanks for the clarification. Now I see how to integrate your thinking with my own. -Steve __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
