matthias/mayan-edms
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Releases Wiki Activity

Fix typo

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Roberto Rosario
2012-08-28 02:30:50 -04:00
parent 6f324c4e00
commit 2b5943f15e
1 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

2
news.html
View File

@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@
<li>
<a href="#20120828"><h3><span class="red">August 28, 2012</span></h3></a>
<h4>GPL violations, update</h4>
<p>To all the people telling me to f****** learn to read and to RTFM the <strong>GPL</strong>: I have read the <strong>GPL</strong>, this is not my first project being released as <strong>Free software</strong>, as <strong>Open Source software</strong> or under the <strong>GPL</strong> (<a href="http://code.google.com/p/descartes-bi/">Descartes BI</a>, <a href="https://github.com/rosarior/django-replication">Django-replication</a>, <a href="https://github.com/rosarior/pdf-form-fill">pdf-form-fill</a>). It is also not the first project to enjoy wide spread use and to be released as a commercial product by other people (<a href="https://github.com/rosarior/django-inventory">Django-inventory</a>), however in those instances the people doing the forks have complied with the <strong>GPL</strong> admirably providing source code for their changes, retaining all copyrights, notices and original license even when being released under a different name. That however is not the situation that is happening now. This is not "whinnying over some little program" (as it is being described commonly in the feedback I'm getting via email), the <strong>GPL</strong> is no less legal than a commercial license and must be followed and enforced equally, <strong>Mayan EDMS</strong> is not some "little program" currently sporting 26,000 lines of code. And just because a program is being released as <strong>Free Open Source</strong> software doesn't make it any less valuable as a commercial counterpart. Finally the entire source was not removed, only the development branch and the hotfix branch for the next version. Let me repeat that again, the entire source code was <strong>NOT</strong> removed only the <strong>TWO (2)</strong> latest <strong>unreleased</strong> branches. Lastly about the commercial competition issue: If I have no problems with people or business making money off <strong>Mayan EDMS</strong>, in fact I proud myself in creating commercial opportunities to others by advertising them, right here, in this very website, on the top menu, three tabs to the right. I hope this clarifies and overturns some of the misinformation being circulated, thank you.<p/>
<p>To all the people telling me to f****** learn to read and to RTFM the <strong>GPL</strong>: I have read the <strong>GPL</strong>, this is not my first project being released as <strong>Free software</strong>, as <strong>Open Source software</strong> or under the <strong>GPL</strong> (<a href="http://code.google.com/p/descartes-bi/">Descartes BI</a>, <a href="https://github.com/rosarior/django-replication">Django-replication</a>, <a href="https://github.com/rosarior/pdf-form-fill">pdf-form-fill</a>). It is also not the first project to enjoy wide spread use and to be released as a commercial product by other people (<a href="https://github.com/rosarior/django-inventory">Django-inventory</a>), however in those instances the people doing the forks have complied with the <strong>GPL</strong> admirably providing source code for their changes, retaining all copyrights, notices and original license even when being released under a different name. That however is not the situation that is happening now. This is not "whinnying over some little program" (as it is being described commonly in the feedback I'm getting via email), the <strong>GPL</strong> is no less legal than a commercial license and must be followed and enforced equally, <strong>Mayan EDMS</strong> is not some "little program" currently sporting 26,000 lines of code. And just because a program is being released as <strong>Free Open Source</strong> software doesn't make it any less valuable than a commercial counterpart. Finally the entire source was not removed, only the development branch and the hotfix branch for the next version. Let me repeat that again, the entire source code was <strong>NOT</strong> removed only the <strong>TWO (2)</strong> latest <strong>unreleased</strong> branches. Lastly about the commercial competition issue: If I have no problems with people or business making money off <strong>Mayan EDMS</strong>, in fact I proud myself in creating commercial opportunities to others by advertising them, right here, in this very website, on the top menu, three tabs to the right. I hope this clarifies and overturns some of the misinformation being circulated, thank you.<p/>
</li>
<li>