This is my last mail about this, if you want to continue the license talk, lets take it outside, maybe to gnu.misc.dicuss?
--- Michael Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That could be a reference to just about any non-GPL'ed Jabber > software. Fine, it could. But the accessing the CVS GPLed for code promised got me annoyed because I encounter the Ransom again. That is what triggered my mail. Note : I only sent a private email to Adam, with all my questions and comments about the Ransom when I encountered it on his webpage. I did not make a big deal out of it, because it was just on his page. I got no answer to my questions, but left it at that. There is no reason for me to bother him about this in public. But the source code for the GPLed Jabber software is hosted on the same CVS server as the Ransom code. The Yabber code and other are not hosted there. I am not worried about non-free Jabber clients, just annoying licensing terms and contradictory actions. You did not put the source code for yabber in a place where free software code is and then not ask me to use it? You did not ask me to delete what I accidentally downloaded? No, and I have no issues with yabber, or any other non-free source code. > For example we could one day choose to release Yabber under the GPL. > Right now > it's not. Fair enough. >From the Yabber FAQ: >Q. Is Yabber open source? Why not? >A. No. We haven't ruled out opening the source code at some stage, >but at this point it is going to remain closed source freeware until >we decide what is in Yabbers best interest. There are heaps of open >sourced clients you can help out on - check JabberStudio and <Sourceforge. That is completly different then putting ransomed code onto a place that someone will inadvertenly download it , and read it, and get into a moral dilemma if they can use snippets of the code. > You are reading way too much into this. Look, all I wanted to do was jump on the bandwagon and try out some jabber stuff. My interpretation is completly fair, I am not trying to make a big deal about it, just presenting the facts. > James Michael DuPont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote : > > The jabberstudio server contains a CVS server that has GPL and JOSL > > code. That is why I went to the jabbercentral.org and downloaded > > the entire source code from cvs to review it. [SNIP] --- Michael Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You downloaded this from "jabbercentral.org*? Jabber central has a > whole > pile of non-open sourced software on it. [SNIP] > Or are you meaning JabberStudio.org? Sorry, I am talking about CVSing sources here, there is no cvs for ransomed code on the "jabbercentral.org" server is there? I meant "JabberStudio.org" they have CVS, I get confused from all these Jabbers : first I read outdated docs that say to download from jabber.org, then I get the source code from there and have to delete parts of it. All I am saying is that I am confused and annoyed by all this. As I said, we can continue this on gnu.misc.discuss if you want, I have stated the facts and my opinions. I dont want insult or bother anyone, not adam or anyone else. My issues are valid, and others may find the situation equally as confusing and misleading as I do. It is really a question of personal viewpoint here isn't it? MIke ===== James Michael DuPont http://introspector.sourceforge.net/ __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
