Re: Corrected version Re: pragma License ?

[Markus E Leypold <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de>]

> Dirk Heinrichs wrote:
>> anon wrote:
>>
>>> L E T   T H I S   D I E ! ! !
>> Yes, and:
>>           \|||/
>>           (o o)
>>  |~~~~ooO~~(_)~~~~~~~|
>>  | Please            |
>>  | don't feed the    |
>>  | TROLL!            |
>>  '~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Ooo~~'
>>          |__|__|
>>           || ||
>>          ooO Ooo
>
>
> Considering that Redmond trolls make a living by spreading
> FUD, the c.l.ada archives should have enough information to guide
> inquiries to the right places, though.

I'm not sure this is a Redmond troll. Live isn't as simple as
this. It's certainly someone with a grudge (and he even pretends that
he has written GPL software and sued somebody about not keeping to the
GPL license condition -- I'm surprised, this certainly did not leave a
blip on _my_ RADAR screen). 

But certainly anon is living in another reality than the rest if us.

Concerning "c.l.ada archives should have enough information to guide
inquiries" I'm not so sure: The discussion on licensing topics has
been somewhat largish and muddled at times (and you and me aren't
altogether free of guilt in that since we mixed politics ("how should
things be, what is the intention" -- remember those discussions on
what the FSF wants?) with the letter of the license ("what written and
what would it mean if one had to go to court").

Regards -- Markus