I almost always do all the cooking on the top of the stove - and sometimes, but seldom, in the oven. I also make zero desserts. Those fall in the realm of things the missus likes to do and I enjoy cooking. So, I make dinner probably 99% of the time. I also make breakfast. I generally feed the ol' bear breakfast in bed. We usually then have nookie time, but that's a bit less socially acceptable now that there's people in the house all the time. The youngest goes home pretty often, as he's not in school. The eldest? She pretty much lives here. She doesn't really get along with her mother well and it just sort of happened that she'd stay here a lot after the big move. Now, with school out, she's here all the time. Then, I have one of the band members staying here for the summer. It'll save her rent and give her more experience. She's only 19 and only has a mother that's alive - and said mother lives out of State. She's a UMA music student and I've taken her under my wing and allowed her to stay here. So, it's pretty hectic which is why the missus was grumpy. She wants me to tone down the company and hive of activity a little, at least for a little while. She's not used to it and doesn't really like it. She puts up with it, but it doesn't make her happy. I like her to be happy, so I'll see what I can do - but I do have a shitload of people visiting, especially next weekend. Anyhow, if you write it from scratch, I'd not really call that a *fork*. I'd say it is no more a fork than phpBB is a fork of SMF or OpenBSD is a fork of Unix. (That latter is pretty specific, as it's a verified clean-room writing, specifically to avoid copyright issues.) Thus it was the term that made me curious as to how you'd fork it and then only 'probably' leave it open source. It's not a big deal, but I try to keep an eye out for things like that. Why? 'Cause I like you and I'd really hate to see the project fail and I'd hate to see you mired in legal issues and end up owing a bunch of money. As for open source, a lot of my stuff goes (went) right into the public domain. Anything business related, however, was strictly proprietary. I don't use Linux because of some giant moral crusade. I use it because it works for me. I honestly don't give a shit about software being strictly open source, though I prefer it. My favorite virtualization software is VMWare, and that's not even remotely open source. I own a copy - and continue to buy upgrades for it, every time they come out. I also use Acronis, another that's absolutely not open source. One of these days, I'll tell you all about Richard M. Stallman. I know him. I've known him for decades. I'm going to guess he's absolutely able to remember my full name, as we've butted heads before. We went to school together. Fuck it... I have a free minute! Story time! Sort of... RMS has a habit of being right - about many things. Let me first say that. I don't dislike him and he's not dirty. He's not unwashed. He doesn't smell bad. None of those claims about him are true. What he is, however, is a zealot. He took over the computer lab at MIT. Back then, the math department didn't have its own computer lab - at least not a very good one and much of the computing was done on the mainframe but with terminals in the math department. He pretty much browbeat everyone (minus a few holdouts such as myself) into not even using passwords on their account. This was so that information could be free and restrictions on code was a bad thing. Because nobody had a password, or they all used the same password, this meant code was always getting deleted, fucked with, or copied and used elsewhere - without permission. Then, he tried to claim the terminals in the math department were under the comp sci department's domain and control. A battle ensued. I'd end up getting sponsored, after I hit the grad program, by DEC and having my own computer equipment. Not even being familiar with it, he (and his cohorts) tried to claim that was also their domain - which meant I simply disconnected it from the comp sci network and thus was able to keep it from being fucked with. Now, he's right about many things. However, he's wrong in that all software MUST be open source. His claim is that proprietary software should be illegal. That takes away my rights to own my software and do with it as I see fit. Granted, I prefer open source and proprietary software can be abusive - but that's not his choice to make, nor is it his choice to make for my users. In his quest for freedom, he's wanting to take away my liberties. He's right about many things but I don't really like him as a person. I don't like zealots very much. I don't like people who try to take away my liberties to enforce their ideologies on me. Regardless of my like for open source, my liberty is to create software and license it any damned way I want. That liberty shouldn't be taken away from me because I might abuse it. It's innocent until proven guilty. Notably, I donated a five figure some to EFF last year. I donated $0.00 to the FSF. I love the EFF, but haven't even a shard of love for the FSF. They have never gotten a dime, nor will they ever get a dime. I donate to EFF every single time they ask (for the most part, I'm sure I've missed some) and even have a regular monthly donation set up. Shit, I gave EFF 24 BTC just 'cause I had them laying around and didn't want to claim them on my taxes. (I'd forgotten I'd mined them until someone told me they were like $650 each.) So, there's a bit of a story about RMS and why I don't donate to the FSF. I don't like someone who's wanting to take away my liberties. As it stands, I can release things open source or closed source. Being allowed to only license it one way would take away my liberties. I'm not okay with that. I'm not even sorry for the novella.