From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,25457a5aee9eaa04 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Received: by 10.68.223.40 with SMTP id qr8mr10683070pbc.0.1338327321749; Tue, 29 May 2012 14:35:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Path: pr3ni63621pbb.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!news2.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.alt.net!news.dizum.com!sewer-output!mail2news From: Nomen Nescio Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Fuzzy machine learning framework v1.2 References: <4fc498ff$0$6548$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net> Message-ID: <8a999e3d2087c61c5cebaf9ad4cce82a@dizum.com> Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 23:35:04 +0200 (CEST) Mail-To-News-Contact: abuse@dizum.com Organization: mail2news@dizum.com Date: 2012-05-29T23:35:04+02:00 List-Id: > It is stunning to see programmers who are used to formal, > rational thinking, becoming irrational. ;-) ;-) There's plenty of that going around! > The *combination* of someone else's work and yours is not your own > work! Right! > The resulting work is *not* the sole intellectual property > of either contributor. Right again! So, why does something think it's reasonable to suggest that you have to open your source because he opened his source? That's going too far. All that's reasonable is to say "if you use this you have to also provide the source for it." The fact GPL infects anything that touches it is wrong, and it's probably not legally enforceable. > Respect the wishes of this someone else! Right. I don't use GPL code because of this. > If someone is more generous than GPL etc. would imply, it is > their choice. They own the rights. And I think we are not to > discuss their generosity, or accuse them of the lack thereof, > if so perceived by us! Right again, but as I said it only goes so far. It's one thing to give something away, or share something, but quite another to give a virus away. It's dishonest. And calling it "free software" is really quite unsupportable.