Peter Graf wrote:
>
> Jochen Merz wrote:
>
> > > >Wolfgang is doing all this in good faith, I'm sure, and I am also
> > > >sure that he may be willing to change if it becomes clear that
> > > >things don't work the way they were planned to work (hoping
> > > >that it is not deliberately sabotaged).
> > >
> > > Who do you suspect of deliberate sabotage?
> > > Were all those compromise proposals which have been turned down, deliberate
> > > sabotage?
> >
> >Sorry, why are you so negative? I don't accuse anybody.
> >I was not talking about past, it was about future ...
>
> So you raise public suspicion against persons of deliberate sabotage in the
> future.
> Who are the persons? What kind of sabotage are you talking about?
I am not going to waste anymore time on THIS rubbish.
The key sentence of my last few mails were:
Give the license a chance, otherwise we keep writing endless emails
forever and nothing will get done.
You ALWAYS skip the positive bits and avoid replying to
positive suggestions, and lead discussions to interpret things
in a way they were never meant to be. Pick a sentence
out of the context, twist it, misinterpret it and lead the
discussion away to areas where it keeps on leading nowhere.
No, thanks.
As for your compromise: what I read out of the mails was, that
some Q40/Q60 programmers would only work under GPL. Fine, thats
what they DEMAND, but where's the compromise? Maybe I'm wrong,
but it is pointless anyway as it will not become GPL -
Wolfgang said this quite clearly several mails ago.
I go ahead with this and with his license.
What YOU do is your business - accept it or leave it ...
but then think about SMSQ/Es being sold with Q40/Q60s.
On what basis are they/will they be? You better sort that
out with registrar.
Jochen
