"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So the GNU GPL has been written by a goal different from the goals > of the GNU project and the FSF. Fascinating. > > The GNU GPL is a legal document, it cannot insist on everything. > > Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you > have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge > for this service if you wish), that you receive source code or can > get it if you want it, that you can change the software or use > pieces of it in new free programs; and that you know you can do > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > these things. > > How can "new free programs" be meant to refer only to "existing > free programs"? > > David, reread that sentence, it talks about using the GNU GPL in other > free software programs.
So "new" = "other" and "existing" in your book. Fascinating. > It is about compatibility with other free licenses. Say the > Modified BSD license. Except that pieces of GPLed programs _can't_ be used in programs licensed under a different license. > That one can't see your writings about the GPL's goals coincide > at all with the statements in the GPL itself, in the FSF's > publications and in Stallman's articles about them as well as > with the opinions of other GNU maintainers and developers, does > not constitute any of those things you are lavishly labelling > people with. > > They coincide with the statements of GPL, the FSF, the GNU project > and of RMS. You are simply misreading things on purpose, this is > not a new side from you. And again, everything that you can muster is flat denial without even an attempt at justifying your outlandish interpretations, and ad hominem attacks. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
