All other issues aside, CDBI is safe. Tony's quite happily looking forward to working on 1.0 and it will go to CPAN. Continue using it.
Tony hasn't gone completely bonkers. There's legal messiness he can't really talk about, but there is an underlying logic.
No (Score:2)
Sorry. I know you and I disagree about this, but it has to be reiterated. Many people are no longer going to trust Tony's judgment. It doesn't matter if CDBI is OK if we're afraid the author's going to threaten us with legal action, take down the mailing lists, or that others are going to fork CDBI to avoid these problems.
Tony should either fall on his sword and turn this module over or figure out some way of winning back the trust of his users (and I can't imagine any way that he could short of keepin
That Confuses Me (Score:1)
Why should I be afraid that anyone would threaten me with legal action for using software according to the license? If I were libelling someone or publishing copyrighted information without permission, that's one thing -- but using the software? I don't understand the concern.
Re:That Confuses Me (Score:1)
Re:That Confuses Me (Score:2)
I don't know how rationally he's acting, but I don't fear being threatened with legal action when I've done nothing wrong.
J. David works really hard, has a passion for writing good software, and knows many of the world's best Perl programmers
Re:That Confuses Me (Score:1)
You must be new to this country. :-)
Re:That Confuses Me (Score:2)
Re:No (Score:2)
Re:No (Score:2)
Sure, Schwern is just spouting feel-good anti-FUD, but the answer to that isn't to respond with FUD. The answer is to take the most appropriate course of action to your situation.
Perhaps you'll be exceedingly risk-averse and stop using CDBI. That's fine, because you're choosing to be risk-averse. Perhaps the sanest course of action for your particular circumstances is to do nothing and wait until this mess sorts itself out. In any case, I fail to see the logic behind your
The Wiki is back! (Score:1)