Re: Copyright/licensing action plan + a sample [PATCH]

[Graham Percival]

On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 09:36:47PM -0300, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> Please don't speak for me.  I am not opposed to GPL v3, but I don't
> want to be involved in any of the legal (or
> laymen-people-interpreting-law) and bikeshedding discussions that this
>  'upgrade' has to involve.  Ie. please reach consensus without me.

Unlike Han-Wen, I *am* interested in armchair lawyering, but this
thread began at an incredibly unfortunate time for me[1].  I have
major problems with the direction this discussion took about 20
emails ago, but require more time before I can examine the issues
closely.

I know you all want to rush ahead on this, but this is one issue
which will not be rushed.  Later today, I have the choice of
working on GUB and dealing with this thread; I will prioritize GUB
(and therefore making releases, particularly ones with fixed OSX
10.5 for both 2.13 and 2.12).

I know that some people might be disappointed by delaying any
meaningful discussion on this issue[2] for another day or two, but
I think the vast majority of users and developers would much
rather get 2.13.4 and 2.12.3 out the door.

Cheers,
- Graham

[1] http://percival-music.ca/blog/2009-09-14-my-kingdom-for-a-towel.html

[2] yes, I am unapologetically calling the past few days' worth of
discussion on this issue non-meaningful.