> In that case, you cannot make any sort of demands or set our > priorities. You can voice your opinion of course (which you did), but
Please do not mis-interprete. I'm aware that any meber of FPC can be a bit more sensitive, but that is not a reson for inpropriate behavior instead of cultural argue, providing fact why specific suggestion can or cannot be incorporate. Unfortunately, it only indicate something else... With free and opensource product you made a trade with voluniers and users to make a reliable and popular product, based on your own (i.e, FPC team) vision and user's requests. I can suggest features which suits to my own needs (declared as a priority to me regarding type of applications I create) and see it is suitable to be incorporate as a general benefit. Then I would have elements to decide to using it or not. Nothing wrong nor insulting I can see. This is obvious and I consider was not needed to be explained (obviously wrong assumption). Once agin, I suggest to be precise on main page what you expect from members of this mailing list. > Afaik the main reason you use 2.1.1 is for the internal linker, not > because of bugs in 2.0.2. The internal linker is not a bugfix, it's a > new feature. The main reason is #4922, as is mentioned already. Internal linker is tested to be used instead of problematic LD on current environmet. > Even if we would want to (and we don't, no matter how hard it may be > for you to believe that), we could not make FPC suddenly closed > source. It contains contributions from tens of people. We would have It is highly unlikely that any project will stay OpenSource and free of charge forever. As example is popular RedHat where worked 100s, maybe 1000s of people (volonitiers and contributers). It become commercial since v 8.0. What is achived is commercial OS with minimum developer costs. In short, It is business decision non-sence that when commercial oportunity become real, simply ignoring it regarding foundation basis license. > to track down and contact every single one of them, and convince all > of them to transfer their copyright to us or to sign some contract > before we could change the license of the compiler, rtl and pretty > much all of the source distributed with FPC. If FreePascal founders are registrated as a company, contract would have legitimity in the law, otherwise will not. _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
