* Shlomi Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-07-07 15:25]:
> It's sort of a "small headed" (see
> http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2004/12/06.html ) "I just
> want to write code and am not interested in any legal details"
> attitude.
Oh, please. Are you really that audacious to suggest that all of
P5P and the TPF combined are ignorant small-minded coders who
don’t care to think about licensing issues? And that you are the
only enlightened one around?
Just because someone disagrees with your position about the
compatibility of licences and insists that you license your code
as GPL/Artistic doesn’t mean they refuse to think about the
matters. It might even mean they know more than you. How about
that? Just imagine for a moment.
Why are you being so obstinate about the licence? Which do you
care more about, to fight a petty political issue about licences
(which you don’t seem particularly well-equipped to fight anyway,
if I may suggest so) or to actually contribute your work to the
community? Where are your priorities?
For the record, I prefer to license my code as liberally as
possible, as well, and most of it is under MIT X11. (There is
some I deliberately released under GPL.) But all of my publically
available Perl code is under GPL/Artistic, and no, it’s not
because I’m dumb or don’t care. Quite the opposite is the case;
all of my licensing choices are rather purposeful.
Now how about you stop wasting your energy and ours on something
that *doesn’t* *actually* *matter*? You have good work to offer.
It’s such a pity that you’d sabotage yourself over such a stupid
issue.
Regards,
--
#Aristotle
*AUTOLOAD=*_;sub _{s/(.*)::(.*)/print$2,(",$\/"," ")[defined wantarray]/e;$1};
&Just->another->Perl->hacker;
