Thank you Mr. Rankin for saying this. Bruce Perens blocked me* (also
calling me a "fool" later to a 3rd party) after I started to brainstorm
the defenses that would be raised about a week or two ago: letting
everyone in the world know what he thought of me for mentioning laches
etc.
Such talk
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 5:01 PM, wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 09:23:06AM +0200, deloptes wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> Recently I found out that when ideology stands higher than pragmatics the
>> whole thing affected dies ... numerous examples like
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 09:23:06AM +0200, deloptes wrote:
[...]
> Recently I found out that when ideology stands higher than pragmatics the
> whole thing affected dies ... numerous examples like communism or democracy
> in our modern understanding.
Joel Rees wrote:
> We may not support GRSecurity's questionable methods, but we may
> well decide we should boycott the companies who induced GRSecurity's
> stance.
>
> If you want to know who those companies are, you can find out pretty
> quickly by searching the web.
I was going to stop writin
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:33 AM, deloptes wrote:
> Nicolas George wrote:
>
>> How do you know you can trust that "legal clarification" better than
>> what any of us could have written? I do not have any legal training, and
>> I know approximatively what is written in the first message, but you
>>
On Sun 30 Jul 2017 at 20:33:50 +0200, deloptes wrote:
With apologies to Ansgar Burchard
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/07/msg01524.html
(who was spot-on with his assessment) and anyone else who sees this
thread as completely off-topic for -user.
> Nicolas George wrote:
>
> > How do
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 05:58:54PM +0200, deloptes wrote:
> to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
>
> > This is my opinion, and I hope y'all read it as critically as
> > you should read anything.
>
> I appreciate and value your opinion, but as so much was written
Nicolas George wrote:
> How do you know you can trust that "legal clarification" better than
> what any of us could have written? I do not have any legal training, and
> I know approximatively what is written in the first message, but you
> would be wrong to take my opinion at face value.
>
> Hav
Le duodi 12 thermidor, an CCXXV, deloptes a écrit :
> I appreciate and value your opinion, but as so much was written here
> regarding this subject I find the legal clarification in place. It saves
> one (like me) a lot of digging in the subject to get an overview. In this
> sense the intention of
to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> This is my opinion, and I hope y'all read it as critically as
> you should read anything.
I appreciate and value your opinion, but as so much was written here
regarding this subject I find the legal clarification in place. It saves
one (like me) a lot of digging in the s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 12:14:53PM +0200, deloptes wrote:
> ni...@redchan.it wrote:
>
> > I needed to highlight some things in the text so one's eyes don't bleed
> > out reading it.
> >
> > Some variation here and there.
> >
> > But the key is you h
Hi,
deloptes wrote:
> not everyone has the time to get a legal overview such that nisus provided.
I beg your pardon. But that "legal overview" is trivial and off topic here.
Firstly, the GRSecurity issue is discussed more than enough by the people
whom it concerns, namely those who contributed c
to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> That's what I was trying to say: while some of the things in his/her
> post may be correct, the way they are brought about seems to aim at
> spreading hate and chaos instead of at finding a good solution.
>
>> Just don't feed him here :-)
>
> Agreed.
Again the moral ju
ni...@redchan.it wrote:
> I needed to highlight some things in the text so one's eyes don't bleed
> out reading it.
>
> Some variation here and there.
>
> But the key is you have individual standing to sue. You don't have to
> ask the free software conservancy or the linux foundation permission.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 03:25:08PM +0200, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> writes:
> > On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 12:35:55PM +, ni...@redchan.it wrote:
> >> haven't assigned your copyrights away then YOU OWN YOUR
> >> CONTRIBUTIONS.
> >
> > Uh, oh. Redchann
writes:
> On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 12:35:55PM +, ni...@redchan.it wrote:
>> haven't assigned your copyrights away then YOU OWN YOUR
>> CONTRIBUTIONS.
>
> Uh, oh. Redchannel.
>
> While what you write is true (everyone should know by now that every
> contributor has a right to sue, Harald Welte's
I needed to highlight some things in the text so one's eyes don't bleed
out reading it.
Some variation here and there.
But the key is you have individual standing to sue. You don't have to
ask the free software conservancy or the linux foundation permission.
And you should not rest on your ri
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 12:35:55PM +, ni...@redchan.it wrote:
[...]
> haven't assigned your copyrights away then YOU OWN YOUR
> CONTRIBUTIONS.
Uh, oh. Redchannel.
While what you write is true (everyone should know by now that every
contributor
It has come to my attention that some entities are claiming that you,
dear Linux Hackers, (1)need to go through some foundation or get some
permission from upon high in-order to sue the progenitors of GRSecurity
for their violation of section 6 of the terms underwhich the linux
kernel is distri
19 matches
Mail list logo
