> > * removed their attribution > > The attribution was never to be added, because a couple of functions > were copied in temporarily to help development of other functions, and > then they were accidentally commited. To be honest it is completely beyond me how somebody manages to read code, considers it usefull (and thus has read the code in such a way that he was searching for something usefull), copy'n'paste the code and commits the code to cvs. And at the end of the day claims that it is an accident. > It was an accident for him to commit it. But it was no accident you > decided to make a public fuss about it. Now you have your public > fuss. Everybody can make his own choice on the manner in which the violation is being reported. Yes, Michael could have send a private mail, but he could also have made the violation even more public by adding some mail address that would have started an even bigger flamewar. But note that 75% of the people following this thread would not have taken too much interest into this violation when you did not jump into the trenches and starting to insult people in order to make a big fuzz about it You have your reasons for wanting a discussion about the GPL violation private, Michael had his reasons for making more people aware of the situation. Just because somebody does not share the same opinion as you don't make him "inhumane", "harming cooperation between open source projects". Neither is it true that somebody is "Not being supportive to the open source community" when he cannot fulfill your request/demand. I wonder what upsets you most, the fact that openBSD is not perfect in terms of that the code contains a GPL violation or that you were forced into a public debate about this while you prefer to flame and insult people privately. Ivo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
