> If you're asking me I would say it's very unfair to make an assertion > regarding someones work, then back out of/refuse to participate in the > discussion which results.
I have nothing more to contribute than what is in the following comments -- >> The first subversion logs for libobjc2 states: >> >> "Added new runtime library, based on GCC 4.4 libobjc, libobjc_tr and >> Objective2.framework." >> >> You may also want to look at that revision, r28632, which shows that >> libobjc2 was initially >> the libobjc runtime with a few minor tweaks. What else do you want me to say or discuss ? I like David and his code, I just don't understand the license. All my doubts are summarized in the comments above. I'm not a lawyer, so I can't contribute any legal insight. I'm sure David will state his position. He'll probably say that he's replaced most libobjc code, so the current code is mostly his and he can pick the license he wants. I have no idea of the legal validity of that assertion. You should ask a lawyer. I'm not a lawyer so I'm not sure why you want me in this discussion. The FSF have lawyers, and GNUstep is an FSF project, so you could ask them. I'm not making any "accusations" as you called them. I'm not trying to diminuish the value of anyone's work. Thanks _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev