[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Further on MEX
From: |
Aravindh Krishnamoorthy |
Subject: |
Re: Further on MEX |
Date: |
Wed, 7 Jan 2009 12:22:49 +0530 |
Dear John,
On 07/01/2009, John W. Eaton <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 7-Jan-2009, Aravindh Krishnamoorthy wrote:
>
> | I was under the impression that you'd like to encourage proprietary
> | addons
>
> Where did you ever get that idea?
>
>> My objection is that it is at least against the spirit of the GPL and
>> I would not like to move further in this direction. I have no
>> interest in encouraging proprietary add-ons for Octave.
My understanding from your earlier mails was different. But now I
understand exactly your thoughts about future of proprietary add-ons
for Octave.
I'm not going to work on the pipe-based binary bridge.
Yours sincerely,
Aravindh
- Re: Further on MEX, (continued)
- Re: Further on MEX, John W. Eaton, 2009/01/05
- Re: Further on MEX, David Bateman, 2009/01/05
- Re: Further on MEX, Aravindh Krishnamoorthy, 2009/01/06
- Re: Further on MEX, John W. Eaton, 2009/01/06
- Re: Further on MEX, Aravindh Krishnamoorthy, 2009/01/06
- Re: Further on MEX, Jaroslav Hajek, 2009/01/06
- Re: Further on MEX, David Bateman, 2009/01/06
- Re: Further on MEX, John W. Eaton, 2009/01/06
- Re: Further on MEX, Aravindh Krishnamoorthy, 2009/01/07
- Re: Further on MEX, John W. Eaton, 2009/01/07
- Re: Further on MEX,
Aravindh Krishnamoorthy <=
- Re: Further on MEX, David Bateman, 2009/01/07
- Re: Further on MEX, Aravindh Krishnamoorthy, 2009/01/07
- Re: Further on MEX, David Bateman, 2009/01/07
- Re: Further on MEX, John W. Eaton, 2009/01/07
- Re: Further on MEX, David Bateman, 2009/01/07
- Re: Further on MEX, John W. Eaton, 2009/01/07
- Re: Further on MEX, David Bateman, 2009/01/07
- Re: Further on MEX, Thomas Weber, 2009/01/08
- Re: Further on MEX, John W. Eaton, 2009/01/27
- Re: Further on MEX, John W. Eaton, 2009/01/07