Josh Sled <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> It seems to me that this is a case where it is wise not to declare war >> and wise not to declare marriage. War helps nobody, and marriage has >> its risks too. > > I don't think it's constructive to frame the discussion this way.
I don't see why; if you have a different way to frame it, great. > I also don't think RMS could usurp the project as you suggest, though it > would be a annoying event. I think you must have misread my message. You don't think he could say "so-and-so is the new official GnuCash maintainer" and produce a code fork? What impedes him from doing so? > I do think it's in everyone's interests to sort out the questions of > copyright of the source tree if it's different from what the files > indicate presently. Yes, that's certainly true. > - I don't like using the overloaded word "Free", and prefer "Open > Source". I defer to the concensus of other gnc-core on this. My point is that, in the interests of peace, it's ok not to get everything we or you want. Which is more important: avoiding a big giant fight with RMS, or not using a word that you think is too overloaded? Thomas _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel