I also think that going from no version control to CVS is a larger step than going from CVS to SVN, and that going from CVS to Subversion is a larger step than going from Subversion to Git
But that's only a 'legacy' problem. Today, going from no version control straight to Git/Hg is much easier than even your first step -- and saves you from having to unlearn all that intermediate junk.
Since the original XPilot is GPLv2 the case is quite clear-cut, as everyone already answered. Perhaps the original developer is confused by comments pertining to v3, such as the following?
Published at http://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/why-free-software-and-apples-iphone-dont-mix, "Why free software and Apple's iPhone don't mix" is one of a series of articles detailing the threats posed by Apple's iPhone to the free software community. It focuses specifically on Apple's "tivoization" model of requiring every application installed on the iPhone to have an approved cryptographic signature, a restriction which is incompatible with version 3 of the GNU General Public License and with user freedoms to share and modify free software in general. (emphasis added)
The URL referred to makes this case based on a quote of the GPLv3 "Installation Information" clause,
"Installation Information" for a User Product means any methods, procedures, authorization keys, or other information required to install and execute modified versions of a covered work in that User Product from a modified version of its Corresponding Source. The information must suffice to ensure that the continued functioning of the modified object code is in no case prevented or interfered with solely because modification has been made.
If you convey an object code work under this section in, or with, or specifically for use in, a User Product, and the conveying occurs as part of a transaction in which the right of possession and use of the User Product is transferred to the recipient in perpetuity or for a fixed term (regardless of how the transaction is characterized), the Corresponding Source conveyed under this section must be accompanied by the Installation Information. But this requirement does not apply if neither you nor any third party retains the ability to install modified object code on the User Product (for example, the work has been installed in ROM).
Even then, I wonder if "incompatible" is not overstating the case. 1) Does conveying here "occu[r] as part of a transaction in which..."? 2) Who exactly is "retain[ing] the ability to install modified object code..."?
Free/Open Source Software is just used by Apple as a way to outsource development -- for free (as in beer). This proves it. They bought CUPS and hired Michael Sweet
What kind of logic equates "bought and hired" to "for free"?
In related news, Apple hardware is widely being used as a way to outsource manufacturing -- for free (as in beer). Want proof? One million people just bought iPhones and subscribed to AT&T...
You may therefore distribute linked combinations of the CUPS imaging library with Apple OS-Developed Software without releasing the source code of the Apple OS-Developed Software.
Note, this exception has been there for the last 5 years:
Commendable effort, yet is the knowledge gained worth it? Somehow it brings to mind this observation:
"I got addicted to trying to identify spam features myself, as if I were playing some kind of competitive game with the spammers."
"Norbert Wiener said if you compete with slaves you become a slave, and there is something similarly degrading about competing with spammers. To recognize individual spam features you have to try to get into the mind of the spammer, and frankly I want to spend as little time inside the minds of spammers as possible."
If I have 30k USD in my bank account, and I spend that money over the course of a year, paying for my rent, food, heating and clothes, and I spent that time developing a wonderful new idea - a fantastic math theorum,
Have you published math theorems? I doubt it, or you'd know the following can't work.
then if that idea does *not* belong to me and anyone else can use it for free, I've been robbed blind; because I paid for that new method and other people are using it for free.
The reason that wouldn't work is that most any theorem you can make needs to use other people's results in its proof. (Certainly mine did.)
another announcement that OS X will include virtual desktops. What a great idea!
Wait, they said there's more in store. Amazing innovations that they're keeping under wraps so that "photocopiers" don't notice... For the real revolution you just have to
Use new boolean logic to narrow search results by entering "AND," "OR," and "NOT" into a search request. You can also search using specific file attributes -- author, type, or keyword, for example.
All features referenced in the Mac OS X Leopard Sneak Peek are subject to change.
why not just pass a law that states that copyright holders must release their work from DRM when the copyright expires. Even better, why not require that copyright holders register a non-DRM copy of ttheir work with a library now.
That, I'd be fine with:-) Note then, that it will take more than just "voting with our wallets".
if I'm willing to give up my fair use rights and buy a DRM enabled device, what concern is it to you? If the content owners are only willing to distribute their works on devices that are DRM enabled then why shouldn't I be free to decide if I want to support them in doing so by buying a DRM enabled device.
Because its' not only about what's being produced now, i.e. artists you might influence by voting with you wallet. Copyrights have also been acquired on large parts of XXth century cultural history -- such as almost all the music and movies. DRM+ever expanding copyrights can effectively lock that away from the public domain. This you cannot influence with your wallet; only by not supporting it through your own law makers, government, courts, and ultimately police.
How to take action against such a great threat must surely be an important part of any critical article
No. That would make the article lose all impartiality, and look like a fund drive. Arguably there is a place for these, but not every journal article or discussion has to be a telethon...
Slashdot Mirror
http://dooblet.com/alternative-to-icewm
http://alternativeto.net/software/icewm/
http://linux.descargargratis.co/icewm/alternatives
How many mathematicians or physicists are there in this list of authors? (I may be wrong, but it seems to me that they my be under-represented?)
Meet DVC...
But that's only a 'legacy' problem. Today, going from no version control straight to Git/Hg is much easier than even your first step -- and saves you from having to unlearn all that intermediate junk.
Self-destructive argumentation, on the other hand, is progressing faster than ever!
The URL referred to makes this case based on a quote of the GPLv3 "Installation Information" clause,
Even then, I wonder if "incompatible" is not overstating the case. 1) Does conveying here "occu[r] as part of a transaction in which..."? 2) Who exactly is "retain[ing] the ability to install modified object code..."?
Do good ideas in HEP really take 16 months to get published/recognized? The paper linked from TFA is from September 2006.
(Same for "person in government".)
In related news, Apple hardware is widely being used as a way to outsource manufacturing -- for free (as in beer). Want proof? One million people just bought iPhones and subscribed to AT&T...
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/05/msg00 033.html
I thought this was the job of business schools, no??
The reason that wouldn't work is that most any theorem you can make needs to use other people's results in its proof. (Certainly mine did.)
Not at all. Your objection is self-deprecating, in so precisely the exact amount to fit the profile that it's almost scary.
...the Man with a Thousand Toolbars (2002).
Classic error. Classic counterexample (among many): a ruler-and-compass construction of the heptagon does not exist.
No. That would make the article lose all impartiality, and look like a fund drive. Arguably there is a place for these, but not every journal article or discussion has to be a telethon...
There he is. And I share your concern abot our justice system. What was that particular settlement about?
Interesting that some areas go to far lower resolution in satellite than in map view. E.g. Reykjavik (where satellite view clearly shows the airport).