Re: how about mutual compatibility between Linux's GPLv2 and GPLv3?

[Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>]

On Jun 21, 2007, "Jesper Juhl" <jesper.juhl@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 21/06/07, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com> wrote:
> [snip]
>> 
>> BTW, I should probably have made clear that, as usual, I was speaking
>> my own mind, not speaking on behalf of FSFLA or Red Hat, with whom I'm
>> associated, and certainly not on behalf of FSF, with whom I'm not
>> associated.  Just in case this wasn't clear yet ;-)

> Given your signature below, no, that's not at all clear :

Do you assume I speak for the GNU project and for University of
Campinas as well, just because my signature implies that I am somehow
associated with them?

>> FSF Latin America Board Member         http://www.fsfla.org/

> If you don't speak for the FSF then adverticing the fact that you are
> a FSF board member seems a little odd.

What's odd is your assuming that I'm an FSF board member.  Especially
when there's a URL just next to it that explains what FSFLA is, and
how it's not the FSF, but rather one of four members of the network of
FSFs.

> I also fail to see (or at least wonder at) how a board member of the
> FSF can state that he's not associated with the FSF... hmm, the mind
> boggles..

Yeah, it's really hard to clarify broken assumptions and jumping to
conclusions.

>> Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}

> Same thing for the RedHat bit here, along with posting from a
> @redhat.com email addr.

Why would this convey the impression that I'm speaking on behalf of
Red Hat, tell me.  It doesn't even say I'm president, CEO, PR manager,
press contact or any such thing...


If I posted from my ISP e-mail address, would you assume I was
speaking for the ISP?

-- 
Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member         http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}