Subject: Re: Pre-new-cgd-license tree?
To: der Mouse <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Chris G. Demetriou <email@example.com>
Date: 07/06/1997 14:58:00
> I just checked this morning's sup, and 26 files in the supped source
> tree still have Chris Demetriou's new license on them, the license we
> saw so much kafuffle about a week or two ago.
> I can only assume that core concluded that this license is acceptable
> to them. [ ... ]
However, in the time since that "kafuffle," they've done almost
nothing to resolve the issue.
They indicated to me that those license terms were unacceptable and
that if I refused to change them, the code would end up being removed
from the tree. However, despite saying that they would suggest an
alternative set of license terms that would be acceptable to then
(since they did OK the previous set, and have now backed out on their
decision, I don't consider it my responsibility to help them sort of
what is acceptable to them) and get that suggestion to me over a week
and a half ago, and saying that they would keep me informed as to the
fruits of their decision making process, they've done neither.
One member of core has been so unconstructive as to make various snide
comments about my license, but not actually do anything that i'm aware
of to help resolve the situation.
As far I can tell, core's just sitting on their thumbs.