"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Again you resort to petty personal attacks, how I kill text is > completely irrelevant to the issue, I'm quite sure you are capable > of following the thread. You also on purpose confuse _goal_ with > what actually happens.
I am in good company, since Richard is quite explicit that the goals of the GPL and its effects correspond (which is why he calls it a pragmatic license). Again, cf. <URL:http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/pragmatic.html> for his words on that: If you want to accomplish something in the world, idealism is not enough--you need to choose a method that works to achieve the goal. In other words, you need to be ``pragmatic.'' Is the GPL pragmatic? Let's look at its results. Consider GNU C++. Why do we have a free C++ compiler? Only because the GNU GPL said it had to be free. GNU C++ was developed by an industry consortium, MCC, starting from the GNU C compiler. MCC normally makes its work as proprietary as can be. But they made the C++ front end free software, because the GNU GPL said that was the only way they could release it. The C++ front end included many new files, but since they were meant to be linked with GCC, the GPL did apply to them. The benefit to our community is evident. So Richard talks explicitly about the _goal_ of the GPL, and he does this immediately before listing a number of projects that set out to create proprietary projects, and then were forced by their use of GPLed software to license them under the GPL. That you apparently consider his words on that matter irrelevant (why else would you neither quote nor comment them even when I cite them to you?) when compared to your own, I find somewhat disrespectful. After all, it was Richard and not you who actually wrote the license. And so for the intent _behind_ the GPL I consider Richard's words quite more relevant than yours, even though your personal intent when _using_ the GPL as a license might be different in some cases. How about actually _explaining_ some of Richard's words in the context of what you claim they are supposed to mean instead of just monotonously accusing me of purported ad hominem attacks and striking everything substantial when replying? -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss