You don't owe me an apology at all for simply quoting Mr. M's usage. The
only reason I posted this was to support your suggestion that he doesn't
care what he says or who he offends. That will work fine in a community
of one.
In this day and age I do have some special words reserved for men wh
Indeed, in this day and age, it is generally accepted that there is
really no shame associated with such a status, thankfully. It is
unfortunate that some phrases of controversial lineage persist in our
language, thus causing offense - often unintentionally. The fact that
such words have take
And I pointed out that I am actually a bastard child. It was not my
choice. I was born that way. The word should not be used as an intended
insult. I didn't notice any apology to me or my late mother posted in
response. I mean, I don't call people "jeremys" or "canadians" in order
to sound ins
When a writer stated that he was put off by the tone off your statement
in which you called some folks "bastards", and you replied that you
really don't care whether he did business with "us" (and I can only
assume you were referring to your own business) - were you working "for"
or "against" A
Peter Nixon wrote:
H... Another piece of software that works with Digium's hardware but
doesn't require any of Digium's resources to maintain, with the added
advantage of having more features than the software that Digium already gives
away for free as a loss leader to sell their hardware..
> > > Matt Riddell wrote:
> > > >I for one have built my business around a product Digium has given
me.
> > >
> > > I'm
> > >
> > > >not about to turn around and stab them in the back.
> > >
> > > RIGHT ON! None of these bastards would have the power of Asterisk to
> > > fork if Digium hadn't ga
>> I find myself in the unusual position of agreeing with Jeremy here. :) (no
> offense intended, Jeremy.) I don't want to get into legalities or dive into> this flame war, but I think that Digium has done the world a great service> by developing, funding, and releasing Asterisk. I think they deser
My name is Joshua Colp, or file on IRC, I am part of the OpenPBX project -
but don't judge me as the enemy because of that. I have already talked with
Mark, Russell, and others about my stand on both OpenPBX and Asterisk. I
still treat them as friends even during these rocky times. I'm not going to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If all parts to OpenPBX were disclaimed and available to Digium, then I
wouldn't have a problem with it.
Their only real reason for forking is because Digium will not or could
not accept their contributions.
Jeremy McNamara
__
Peter Nixon wrote:
Can someone please explain how this "works against Digium"??
It is not Digium, its Asterisk that you will be working against. You
are segmenting the limited amount of resources that are available to the
Asterisk development effort. This general topic was well hashed
On Sun, 9 Oct 2005, Peter Nixon wrote:
> H... Another piece of software that works with Digium's hardware but
> doesn't require any of Digium's resources to maintain, with the added
> advantage of having more features than the software that Digium already
> gives away for free as a loss leader
On Sunday 09 October 2005 20:17, Reid Forrest wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:asterisk-biz-
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeremy McNamara
> > Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2005 11:52 AM
> > To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
> > Subje
Peter Nixon wrote:
> I am not saying that I or anyone else involved is trying to damage Digium
> (The
> results of our efforts will be be more good GPL code which Digium is allowed
> to re-incorporate into any of their products under the terms of the GPL)
> but on what basis do you say that anyo
Jeremy McNamara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>That doesn't mean I could not fund the effort. After all how much
>financial backing does this fork really have?
You could only fund the effort if the IP holder wanted you to do so.
In terms of financial backing, I would suspect that they don't have
mu
On Sunday 09 October 2005 16:03, Matt Riddell wrote:
> Well, that's enough on the topic for me...
>
> This is the Asterisk List and that product has ceased to be Asterisk. I
> don't see why Digium (who gave us all Asterisk) should have to pay for
> advertising for a group of people who sign contra
Doug Meredith wrote:
I won't delve into the subtleties of the licensing, but I am curious
if you have standing to take action for violations of the licenses of
these products. As I understand it, only the intellectual property
holder can do so, not a third party.
That doesn't mean I could
Doug Meredith wrote:
Jeremy McNamara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Furthermore, I better not see any H.323, G.729 or OpenSSL support in
this forked version or I will make it personal and sick the legal types
after whomever is responsible.
I won't delve into the subtleties of the licens
Jeremy McNamara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Furthermore, I better not see any H.323, G.729 or OpenSSL support in
>this forked version or I will make it personal and sick the legal types
>after whomever is responsible.
I won't delve into the subtleties of the licensing, but I am curious
if you h
18 matches
Mail list logo
