Mark Kent wrote:
> Peter Köhlmann <peter.koehlmann@xxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> 7 wrote:
>>
>>> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
< snip >
>>>>> I provided about 10 references. You selected one of them and then
>>>>> quote-mined the article for one survey (among several others, some
>>>>> positive) which reveals a negative picture. You know, Microsoft funded
>>>>> some GPLv3 surveys too and got busted. It wasn't surprising to see the
>>>>> outcome of these surveys.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In short: You select the ones you like. And then disregard those you
>>>> don't like because they contradict your GPL3-cult.
>>>> Why am I not surprised?
>>>
>>> No. Your problem is your dumbness in insisting no one
>>> should use GPL3 because the sky would fall down.
>>> It didn't.
>>> Now Get over it.
>>> Plenty of projects are adopting GPL3.
>>> So will I.
>>
>> Fine. I will *never*
>> Nothing I write will *ever* be released under a "GPL2 or later" clause.
>> Not ever
>
> Fine - walk with the dinosaurs!
>
What is wrong with "GPL2 only"?
--
We are Linux. Resistance is measured in Ohms.
|
|
