On 2015-02-23, Lisi Reisz <lisi.re...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Monday 23 February 2015 12:19:56 Christian Groessler wrote: >> "fork" implicates two or more (independend) development branches. >> >> I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, "sc" was orphaned since at least 15 >> years. >> >> So, the OP when he started to add new features/bug fixes/etc., created a >> "new >> version", not a "branch". > > Tell that to the KDE4 folk. They refused to let the TDE project keep the > letters KDE anywhere in the name. They hold the copyright, so can do this.
It's a question of trademark rather than copyright in this instance. > > But it is a continuation of KDE3 (no longer developed) and has in fact > continued to use the KDE3 version numbering system, carrying on from where > KDE3 left off. So by your definition it is not even a fork. > > Lisi > > (Similarly with MATE and GNOME2.) I side with Christian on this one. It's hard to think of it as a fork when one branch is completely dead. (That would be a one-pronged fork! What's the point?!) It seems more like a continuation. Anyway, regardless of the terminology, simply to appropriate the name "sc" might be perceived as bad manners. I would encourage the OP to attempt to contact the former developers(s) first if he or she wishes to use that name. -- Liam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/slrnmemc4t.4ta.liam.p.otoole@dipsy.tubbynet
