jimtabor wrote:It is a subject of understanding that more than two groups where working for self interests for some type of financial gain. These analyses are still underway.
Again, show me the evidence. Don't go around making accusations and when asked for evidence say "I'm still working on that".
jimtabor wrote:My claim,, you may not have made an eu cent. What you had written in the private mail and other posts do read that you had motives, but not financial.
So which is it, I may not have made an eu cent (implying that you still hold open the possibility that I did make money) or my motives were not financial?
Of course I had motives: to create a free Windows-compatible OS, unencumbered by Microsoft copyrights.
jimtabor wrote:Removing others work with out their written permission is just one more.
Huh? This happens all the time in open source projects. When someone rewrites a piece of code, he obviously removes the code it replaces. I've seldom seen the original author of the removed code being asked for permission.
jimtabor wrote:You can not openly assert that the code is from other sources with out knowingly having seen the evidence.
Go back to the mailing lists. The evidence is there.
jimtabor wrote:You did create a svn kernel rewrite tree, did you not?
I did. What's wrong with that? It's called a fork, a very common occurance in open source projects.
jimtabor wrote:ReactOS is GNU and is about freedom and forgiveness, not under the control of SFLC which is about money and the "force removal" of code and the developers that might have been naughty. So what side are you on?
The side that wanted to create a Windows compatible OS without including copyrighted Microsoft code.
If you have the IRC logs from the private chat. Casper was pushing the idea of starting the project over. We opposed this idea later and even on that chat. You thought it was a good idea. Kernel rewrite? Now we know that Casper did have financial motives and was in the process of destroy the entire project and reserecting it later. Did you know this yourself? What was your involvement with www.eudicon.com
? Where you going to work with Casper and harmut to be a full time maintainer of this reserected project? Like a Alexandre Julliard thing.
What I know about Eudicon is that it's Caspers company. It's the company that paid for the SVN and build servers (and their hosting) used at that time. I browsed around www.eudicon.com
, I can't find a single reference to ReactOS (or any Windows compatible free OS for that matter). Again, you're making vague accusations (this time against Casper and Hartmut) without providing any evidence.
jimtabor wrote:Months before the audit, you was angry about Wax as TC and a ReactOS realease. Why?
Not about Wax, I didn't like the process. In the end that was resolved by a developers vote, like it should have.
jimtabor wrote:The project wasn't fun anymore, things started working correctly. Other than Alex bashing, why would that not be fun? ReactOS was starting to work and peek! That in itself is not fun? Did you not want this project to succeed?
You couldn't be more wrong. The fact that the project was loosing it's fun had nothing to do with things starting to work correctly. You have no idea how thrilled I was to get Firefox working.