Re: "keep non-free" proposal
> > You've stated that you disagree with my intended interpretation of the
> > SC. I believe the concept in question is that we're promising to
> > distribute in 100% free form software systems which have been in 100%
> > free form.
On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 09:26:04PM -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote:
> I'm not sure what a free form software is, but I think I get what you're
> saying.
form was a typo -- I should have removed it from the sentence
before posting.
> > If you disagree with this interpretation, perhaps you could state
> > yours?
>
> I don't disagree with the intended interpretation. I disagree with the
> manner in which your proposals were written. That's all. Suffield's
> proposals are much more conservative in their changes and more direct in
> meaning.
One of his proposals is more conservative in its changes. The
other -- the one which has been introduced -- is pretty radical.
--
Raul
Reply to: