|In reply to Comment 144 (Fabio Alemagna):|
>> Yes, but was it neccessary?
>It wasn't "necessary", nothing is "necessary" around here, not even your or my
>posts are "necessary", however it was the most obvious and simple way to deal
>with the issue.
What the GPL foundation recommends is the most obvious way and convinience really isn't an argument for what is the right thing to do, if you ask me.
>> Couldn't this have been settled by private e-mail or something?
>Anything could have been done, but people tend to go for the least effort.
>Anything in nature follows the least effort rule, so do humans. Some humans
>are bound to the least effort rule so much that they forget about other rules,
>though (hint hint!) :-)
That is an explanation as good as any, but it doesn't justify anything, I'm afraid. Furthermore, this is not the first time it's been pointed out to Bernie that it's better to contact the developer(s) it concerns directly before posting claims and accusations in public forums.
>> It sure could and should, IMO.
>Why should? Explain, please. And no, being "polite" is a non-answer: to me,
>it's not unpolite to talk about it publicly.
Why humiliate someone in public for something that could be and seem very much like a simple and unintentional neglect? Bernie has taken part of similar discussions before (you too, remember?) and should know better, I know he does. Why he insists on discouraging Amiga developers from coming anywhere near GPL licensed software is beyond me, I thought he was quite a supporter of the GPL.