[sword-devel] ISV status?

[Andrew Thule]

Chris, I should add in response to your last comment, if you ever find I'm
distributing something I shouldn't be - please don't hesitate to tell me.
I'm more than happy to remove it.

As it stands now however I have done exactly what you asked when you've
asked - so you should have no complaint against me.

~A


On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 1:02 AM, Andrew Thule <thulester at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 2:55 AM, Chris Little <chrislit at crosswire.org>wrote:
>
>>
>> I credit you for taking it down, but you haven't explained why YOU felt
>> it was YOUR place to do it in the first place. 'Andrew Thule posts the
>> module on his FTP site' is not part of our release process.
>
>
> Because I was trying to help.  I assumed that module development was
> covered under licenses, and have no other way to share modules I create
> with members of this list.
>
> The wiki doesn't prohibit the sharing of Copyrighted modules under
> development, so it was reasonable to assume since the module itself was
> being distributed to the word, modules being developed could be distributed
> also.
>
>
>
>>
>> Yet, why would that have anything at all to do with you? You have no
>> connection to the publishers, you didn't do the conversion, and you are in
>> no way a part of the release process.
>>
>> You say you checked the distribution rights presented in isv.conf, but it
>> contained exactly the string present in those modules that we have told you
>> in the past that you may not re-distribute. You prevent reading of other
>> such .confs on your FTP site, so you're clearly aware that this is material
>> you should not be re-distributing. But you did it anyway, because you're
>> content to act without thinking.
>
>
> I'm a member of this list, trying to help, volunteering my time, and Nic's
> question wasn't directed at anyone in particular.  He was asking about a
> version of the ISV which contained the OT, which I had.
>
> Why wouldn't it have anything to do with me?  Is there something somewhere
> that says only certain members of this list can help?  Where does it say
> only those folks directly connected to the publisher can make improvements?
>
> Yes, as in my other response, you're still pressing away at the false idea
> I ignored the licenses.  You still have to clarify that bit with respect to
> who can and who cannot offer improvements and whether or not development is
> excluded from 'distribution'.  I was offering an improved module (and OSIS)
> TO Crosswire for distribution by Crosswire's repo.
>
> I admit that my thinking is limited at times.  In this case it is limited
> by what I don't know - which is why you've been asked for clarification.
>
> ~A
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.crosswire.org/pipermail/sword-devel/attachments/20130106/bf478250/attachment.html>