Re: [aspell-devel] VC6 and BCB5.5 patches

[Jose Da Silva]

On Thursday 24 February 2005 06:17 am, Gary Setter wrote:
> <snip>
>
>>> Fact is there are lots of ordinary people who
>>> have to do projects based on decisions others make for them,
>>> and if it comes down that .NET support is required, there is
>>> nothing they can do.
>>
>> Yes, there is little point in working on a project that is
>> moving in the wrong direction. If everyone is using .NET,
>> and you can't make it work, then you are moving away from
>> the majority and nobody is going to be able to use
>> what you have. However, if you choose your terms/commands
>> carefully, you could get things to work without having to resort
>> to specific special commands. For example, gcc has moved up to 3.x,
>> yet Kevin is trying to maintain 2.95 compatibility for as long as
>> possible to keep it compatible across the biggest range possible.
>
> You do recognize that some people would consider feeding
> themselves and their family reason enough to comply with a
> demand for .NET support?

You appear to come short on saying it out loud, but since you bring
it up again, I am going to guess that someone is willing to pay you
to put in .NET support.
Congratulations.

> You don't have to support anything you don't want to support.
> I'm just saying not everyone has that luxury. 

That was very short-sighted.
Not only to me, but highly likely to many people as well.
Not only are you assuming nobody else have themselves or families
to feed or worry about, but you are assuming we all have abundant
amounts of luxury and time too.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.

>>> If .NET is not compatible with the LGNU, then I can
>>> understand that providing .NET support would be like
>>> aiding and abetting a violation of the LGNU license. Bummer.

It is a Bummer, but the people who have contributed under GNU
or LGNU contributed because they knew that their code would
continue to be GNU or LGNU.
Since GNU and Linux is getting the attention of Microsoft, you will
most likely want to read the .NET license as well because it may
have similar complaints which may not allow you to pull .NET
commands or terms into GNU.
Frankly, I don't think things would go as far as they have if say this
was a BSD license or another type of license.  In other words, you
probably would not be asking these questions about adding .NET
support because Aspell probably wouldn't be as advanced as it is
now thanks to the GNU/LGNU licenses.


<snip>

> I'm not sure I follow what you're proposing. Can you explain?

Read the 2nd-half of the 2nd paragraph at the top of this message.