Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on January 27, 2007 02:10 AM
No, you're making assumptions.
I merely stated that I wished to in the future, see the license mentioned in articles about software, because I would like to know.
I also merely stated that Geeklog 1.41 is GPL, but 2.0 is planned to ship under another license, so anyone who reads, can know about that.
Never did I suggest a rebuff, nor did I say that not using GPL is bad. As far as I know, it is undecided what license to use for 2.0 but considerations has been to use MPL or LGPL, which is perfectly fine with me.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Assumptions
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on January 27, 2007 02:10 AMI merely stated that I wished to in the future, see the license mentioned in articles about software, because I would like to know.
I also merely stated that Geeklog 1.41 is GPL, but 2.0 is planned to ship under another license, so anyone who reads, can know about that.
Never did I suggest a rebuff, nor did I say that not using GPL is bad. As far as I know, it is undecided what license to use for 2.0 but considerations has been to use MPL or LGPL, which is perfectly fine with me.
#