Jorge Luis Zapata Muga wrote: > On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 10:46 PM, Mike Rutter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 10:25:52PM +0200, Jorge Luis Zapata Muga wrote: >> >>> Eina suddenly has gotten attention, not because of its technical >>> features, but because i wanted it to be lpgl *and* raster has said >>> that he wants to push eina's effort. That's the real thing, nobody >>> cared about it on the past two years until cedric was interested and >>> pushed it into proto and pfritz did the string thing. Nobody. Raster >>> has expressed his will on that library, so what happens? everyone is >>> going to love eina because of that? if that's the case this is not a >>> community is a herd. >>> >> I would just like to point out that you are making the arguments that: >> >> 1) Everyone does their own thing in E CVS, there is no leadership or >> guidance for the project. >> 2) Developers paying attention to a direction the project lead wants to go >> in makes them sheep. >> >> I don't know, but it seems a touch contradictory to me. Much like >> claiming the reason for a small community is because of a license, and >> then causing community fragmentation by pushing a license when the >> license argument has been shown to have serious holes. >> > > True, it looks like but it isnt. Let me explain. The community > fragmentation is *not only* the license, it is mainly because of point > 1. Point 2 is refered to people that won't code on eina and for people > that *hears* raster to make a decision by themselves. Is not that > contradictory, happens that those points are related to two different > groups of ppl. > > I have never stated that making a project licensed under lgpl will > make it have more developers or being it bsd it will have less coders > at all, i have said that it can't be confirmed. What i have stated is > that *i* don't want my code to be freely available to companies that > won't follow the same openness on the code, that's it. it wont alter > the POV for specific developers that want to code to open source > projects, just alters those developers that don't want their code to > be restricted on its use by companies that won't release the code. > > Given this information, why did you decide to even contribute to the EFL. Did you think that having multiple licenses would be fine with everyone? >> Mike >> dancingeek >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge >> Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes >> Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world >> http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ >> _______________________________________________ >> enlightenment-devel mailing list >> enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge > Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes > Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world > http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ > _______________________________________________ > enlightenment-devel mailing list > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel >
------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
