I'll respond to most of this later (I'll be traveling for a few days), but I just had to say:
> How is the technical issue of your inability to build a piece of > software on a particular proprietary OS remotely relevant? The license > certainly doesn't stop you from doing so. I'm on an older MacOS (10.2.x), various prerequisites for the current fink GIMP package don't seem to build with the toolchain available for that edition, and I'm disinclined to harass the maintainers or shell out for an otherwise needless upgrade to a proprietary OS just to bypass this issue. I prefer to use Debian when I can because it Sucks Less (TM), and I think this is a valid example of Free Software cutting off its nose to spite its face. Forget the legalities for a moment. Why don't you think it's legitimate for a maker of camera-related software to protect its investment in the extremely tedious process of calibrating against various lenses, which results in information that if published they could not protect from freeloaders by any other means, by keeping that one fragment closed source while contributing to the usefulness (and probably even the extent) of the GPL commons? Cheers, - Michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
