On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:37:45AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote: > > So what you are actually proposing is that the current developers or > whoever distributes LyX (including Kayvan, the Linux distributors etc) > take some legal risk just for the benefit of a random Windows user that's > neither able to compile LyX himself nor able to ask his colleague for help?
I'm proposing nothing of the kind. Some posters here have used language suggesting that some kind of relicensing melarcky might go forward. I certainly hope not. As I said, it would be bad for LyX, the GPL and for open source in general. > So we agree and I seem to have missed your point entirely... Possibly. You might try rereading some of my postings skipping John Levon's responses, which have included paragraphs of mine that are confusing without the context.
