🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <D4wr43.1sG@oea.xs4all.nl> guest@oea.xs4all.nl writes:

>   The fact that you haven't released it (not even the binary) tells us
>   that you never intended to do so and whatever concession you tried to
  That statement is so far off base it isn't even wrong.  The binary has
been released, and there are no restrictions on its reproduction.

>   regard is the fact that you made it as difficult as you possibly can for
>   your customers to obtain even the source code they have a legal right
>   to.

  All of our customers can get all source code any time they want at no
charge without asking us.  And it requires no work on their part.  It 
couldn't be much easier.

>   It is one the absurdities of life that a regular GNU basher like you is
>   making his living parasitizing off their hard work. And to add insult to

  Ah ha, one again, declared a "GNU basher" 

>   injury, you are whining about the fact that they won't change their
>   long-held and carefully thought out principles for your sake. In other

  One of the hallmarks of a cult is the they don't allow the smallest 
deviation of opinion.  The gpl is a long document subject to interpertation.
The FSF just didn't believe that any interpertation but theirs could be
valid.  

>   words, you're not content to be a simple parasite but aspire to be a
>   parasitoid.
>
>   Please understand that I don't really care if you release the source code
>   or not, but I do (intensely) dislike subterfuge.
  
   Subterfuge, you mean like hiding behind a guest account with no signature?








--

----

Art Kreitman				Congruent Corporation
artk@congruent.com                      110 Greene Street
212-431-5100                            New York, New York 10012
fax 219-1532