On 2018-12-26, Carl <ca...@panix.com> wrote: > On 12/26/18 12:00 AM, John Hasler wrote: >> rhkramer writes: >>> Well, it could have been "based" (or inspired, or similar) based on >>> PGP even if it was newly written code. (And my guess / recollection >>> from that time is that it was so "based" / inspired / whatever -- very >>> similar functionality.) >> It was inspired by PGP and designed to be compatible. It could not have >> been based on PGP because the latter was not Open Source. There is no >> common code. > > OK, I literally own nitpicking.com and I wouldn't be making such > a big deal about the meaning of "based on." Just say "When I wrote 'based > on' I meant 'based on the same code base.'" and move on.
That's what he did say (you seem to have nitpicked yourself into a support of the adverse argument).
