On Jul 21, 2008, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Alexandre Oliva wrote: >>> but it's a one way trip and that copy of such code no longer has its >>> original license terms. >> Can you back this up? All the evidence I've got suggests the exact >> opposite. > I thought you had just agreed with this in another posting. No, I first said it wouldn't make sense for an author to try to enforce something that is permitted by the license s/he granted. Then, in another posting, you proposed the idea above and asked for confirmation, and then I responded explaining why I believe the exact opposite holds, and that you probably thought what you did because of your mistaken understanding as to how the GPL works. > Of course the original copies of works covered by less restrictive > licenses would remain available That's not what I'm talking about. Please re-read the message in which you thought I agreed with the above, and follow up if you need clarification on my position. >>> Some people seem to think the story has changed recently, >> On both sides :-) (for such large values of recently as 1995+ :-) > I generally don't expect the truth to vary from day to day on this > sort of issue, even for some moderately large number of days. And yet you get the impression that Linus' statement you cited, from back in 1995, changed the story in any way. -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org} FSFLA Board Member ¡Sé Libre! => http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
