From: David Moore <dave.42.moore@gm...> - 2008-08-07 06:55:16
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Nathan Ingersoll wrote:
> Maybe this speaks more about your experience than the project as a
> whole. I certainly feel part of a community from years of working with
> good people that have treated each other with respect. I have
> regularly seen people come through and hurt the community by refusing
> to work with others or don't treat others with respect.
> Do you feel that every new person that comes to the project should be
> allowed to choose a new license? re-implement an existing component?
> Whether you try to dismiss what I have to say as "word games" or not,
> you are nowhere near arguing a strong reason that you should be able
> to impose a license change on the project. You are basically saying
> "This is what I want, so that's how it should be." And if you're
> listening to the people on this list, many of us only want one license
> in the project.
> Seeing as the point of eina was to unify the use of data structures
> and utility functions, this is a very fracturing decision.
I am merely a lowly e17 user (and former packager), but in the hope that more
voices might stop this madness, I'd like to add my support for Nathan here.
This is a community-fracturing decision, and it's being pushed through with a
complete lack of consensus. Multiple licenses under e17 is also going to make
packaging it for distribution harder - you can't create a metapackage which will
pull in all libs under one licence. It's not hard to work around, but it makes
things harder with no gain.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----