On Monday 29 December 2003 05:32 pm, Mike Sensney wrote: > At 11:48 AM 12/29/2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Sorry, my mistake. I was going to make a comment, but coffee arrived, > > > > and > > > > > I hit the wrong button. > > > >Just a quick comment to point out I was rather roundly trounced and then > >asked > >to not discuss this anymore on this dev-list the very last time such a > >topic > >came up. > > > >I guess it is "who" makes a comment more than "what is being said" that > >matters here. > > > >Sigh..... > > No Bob. It was entirely what you were saying. > > The Mitel people on this list answered your multiple email messages on > that thread the best they could and to considerable length. They said > that they believe Mitel to be in complete compliance with GPL. > > They also requested that if you have further questions about GPL compliance > > to contact the Mitel legal staff. This should have been the end of the > thread, > but you would not let it drop.
I was asked questions, which I took the time to answer. Nothing more. I asked some questions which Mitel took the time to answer. Nothing more. As for whatever Mitel employees told me about how they had complied with GPL, they are welcome to that opinion and they are certainly welcome to tell me whatever makes them happy. <- That is their right and I will fight for them to have it. I certainly welcomed it, but the fact that they said it was of their own doing, not mine. > > The odds of SME 6.0 unsupported's survival will be vastly improved if the > Mitel people decide to stick around and help us over the rough parts. > There is no obligation for them to do so. Whether or not they choose to > participate will in part be determined by how they are treated. > > Your pressing this issue was at best not polite. At worst it was > threatening > the survival of SME 6.0 Unsupported by alienating the people who are most > knowledgeable about its internal structure. This is nothing more than silver coated bull droppings. There is NOTHING released that requires or is significantly enhanced by said people once the material is turned over. And NOTHING I did would have prevented the material from being turned over. Remember almost all of the development efforts by employees of Mitel, since esmith was bought by Mitel, have been in packages that are NOT being placed into SME6, as these packages are NOT being released under GPL and SME6 will ONLY be GPL. Your paragraph above leaves exactly the opposite impression. As such it is specious. > > As such I thought that thread should end. > Exactly what I was referring to. Thank you for making my point. It *IS* who(m) is talking. Very best regards; Bob Finch > > -- > Please report bugs to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Please mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] (only) to discuss security issues > Support for registered customers and partners to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Searchable archive at > http://www.mail-archive.com/devinfo%40lists.e-smith.org -- Please report bugs to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] (only) to discuss security issues Support for registered customers and partners to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Searchable archive at http://www.mail-archive.com/devinfo%40lists.e-smith.org
