On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 10:12 AM, C Anthony Risinger <[email protected]> wrote:
>> if i don't even _know_ how it works, because i haven't been consulted >> nor informed of decisions how the bloody hell am i supposed to do >> that?? > > while i'm off to bed and way to tired to look ATM, i'm certain you > took part in the discussion, but i'll have to dredge up the messages. it was after the fact. i didn't say anything because i didn't want to "rock the boat". now i've seen the consequences of letting it continue (which i wasn't aware of at the time), it's gone. > whether you agreed or not full heartedly i don't recall, but it > certainly wasn't a brick wall, and probably more like a "hand-wavy" > motion. it may not have worked quite as expected, but there is no > point in the crusade against Google/GWT/etc ... i mean, that's like > biting the hand that feeds ... there would be much more work to do > without the endless stream of working code. so what if someone else > got paid to write it -- none of us did it. regardless. google will have to make do with having their copyright notices retained. that will suffice. they can make a google search with their google engine to find the fact that the word google is mentioned in the copyright file, the credits and the source code files themselves. l.
