Hello David,
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 05:51:46PM -0800, David Champion wrote:
> * On 29 Jan 2016, martin f krafft wrote:
> >
> > It's a shame to hear that Karel doesn't do his work within the
> > community. mutt-kz is a nice piece of work and why not provide an
> > officially experimental mutt?
>
* On 29 Jan 2016, mutt-us...@rcdrun.com wrote:
>
> So, whoever is producing the fork, DOES work with the community within
> the scope of the GNU GPL.
Working within a development community and keeping the terms of a
license are disjoint. Doing one gains you no ground on the other.
mutt-kz keeps
Hello,
I don't understand why be jealous on something that has been clearly
worked out in the licence itself.
I don't know who is that man, but speak to him. Don't blame people for
doing something that was intended to do in the first place.
It was intention that everyone can make a fork and do w
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 11:13:52PM -0800, David Champion wrote:
> * On 29 Jan 2016, mutt-us...@rcdrun.com wrote:
> >
> > So, whoever is producing the fork, DOES work with the community within
> > the scope of the GNU GPL.
>
> Working within a development community and keeping the terms of a
> li
* On 29 Jan 2016, mutt-us...@rcdrun.com wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I don't understand why be jealous on something that has been clearly
> worked out in the licence itself.
>
> I don't know who is that man, but speak to him. Don't blame people for
> doing something that was intended to do in the first p
Dear David,
The efforts to bring back some sources to the original mutt are to be
made by those developers of the original mutt.
That is the point of the GNU GPL licence.
I have looked up in my dictionary the word "envious":
_painfully desirous of another's advantages_
You see the disadvantage
* On 29 Jan 2016, Will Yardley wrote:
>
> I wasn't familiar with mutt-kz, but ultimately, I think some of these
> projects have helped in less direct ways. I didn't follow the (now
> defunct, AFAICT) mutt-ng project much, but it seems to me as if it put
> some much needed pressure in terms of mak
also sprach mutt-us...@rcdrun.com [2016-01-30 21:07
+1300]:
> The efforts to bring back some sources to the original mutt are to
> be made by those developers of the original mutt.
I disagree. The open-source ecosystem works best if you avoid forks
and try instead to move all improvements as far
* On 30 Jan 2016, mutt-us...@rcdrun.com wrote:
>
> to the person who has made the forked mutt? Why bash such person, who is
> contributing, on the public list that is going to stay here for ages.
So you've now accused me of jealousy, envy, and "bashing" -- I guess
that's defamation? I don't thi
I am sorry to bring you any negative feelings.
10 matches
Mail list logo
