From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from Ishtar.sc.tlinx.org (ishtar.tlinx.org [173.164.175.65]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C59CB386EC6C for ; Sat, 14 Nov 2020 07:23:28 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org C59CB386EC6C Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=tlinx.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cygwin@tlinx.org Received: from [192.168.3.12] (Athenae [192.168.3.12]) by Ishtar.sc.tlinx.org (8.14.7/8.14.4/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id 0AE7M89d019822; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 23:22:10 -0800 Message-ID: <5FAF85CB.8000705@tlinx.org> Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 23:22:51 -0800 From: L A Walsh User-Agent: Thunderbird MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marco Atzeri CC: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Commercial use of cygwin References: <34a5e2b9-5179-c0b6-e8b0-1245e7a4578f@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <34a5e2b9-5179-c0b6-e8b0-1245e7a4578f@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: cygwin@cygwin.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2020 07:23:30 -0000 On 2020/11/12 02:42, Marco Atzeri via Cygwin copied the whole note: > On 12.11.2020 09:42, Antonio Sidoti via Cygwin wrote: > I was looking into using Cygwin for commercial use... > [27 lines of duplicate text] > > in general there is no restriction on usage. > Marco If you are going to bottom post, please trim your quotes. If you need to quote the original for context, only quote what is needed for context. In a threaded reader, your reply is placed under the original poster's email, where, if a reader is interested, it was just read. Duplicating the entire note isn't necessary nor, I'd bet, really wanted, by most.