At the very least, he could have done something dramatic yet positive. Pulling down all his code like that, I really think he was out to spite everyone.
I have no idea what he was thinking about then when he took his stuff down, so you may be right. But having read his work for a few years I don't think it was spite; that just doesn't seem like him.
He worked for years on code and writings with free licenses - so for the most part he didn't really "delete" his work, but rather just stopped distributing it. He must have been aware of this fact when he took his sites/accounts down.
> If that were the case he would have never written it in the first place.
Or written it with some license that stipulates it cannot be used in either closed source or any open source applications, only for 'educational' use. Worse, he could have tried to do it retroactively.
Comments
At the very least, he could have done something dramatic yet positive. Pulling down all his code like that, I really think he was out to spite everyone.
I have no idea what he was thinking about then when he took his stuff down, so you may be right. But having read his work for a few years I don't think it was spite; that just doesn't seem like him.
He worked for years on code and writings with free licenses - so for the most part he didn't really "delete" his work, but rather just stopped distributing it. He must have been aware of this fact when he took his sites/accounts down.
When someone gives you a bunch of stuff that you are able to use for a while and then decides to retract it that's still a net positive to you.
You have no right to continue to demand he makes his work available to you.
> I really think he was out to spite everyone.
If that were the case he would have never written it in the first place.
> If that were the case he would have never written it in the first place.
Or written it with some license that stipulates it cannot be used in either closed source or any open source applications, only for 'educational' use. Worse, he could have tried to do it retroactively.
I doubt he had that intention.
>You have no right to continue to demand he makes his work available to you.
He has every right to demand it.