[Fwd: Re: [FoRK] Re: Okay, I've had it! (Daily Rant vol. N, large N)]

Stephen D. Williams <sdw at lig.net> on Fri Sep 14 08:23:21 PDT 2007


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Re: [FoRK] Re: Okay, I've had it! (Daily Rant vol. N, large N)
Date: 	Fri, 14 Sep 2007 11:22:55 -0400
From: 	Stephen D. Williams <sdw at lig.net>
To: 	Friends of Rohit Khare <fork at xent.com>
References: 	<8FB698E6-4099-4BA7-92D7-25374F3CE362 at place.org> 
<BD333134-8B83-4D33-B7F4-6B7B4B80A830 at place.org> 
<2cb10c440709131251p39b7a662x7f87c3841d4213a9 at mail.gmail.com> 
<e3b2914c0709131311g47d9b7b5v4ca4ba8b67a98ee4 at mail.gmail.com> 
<46EA081A.5040802 at lig.net> 
<497072fd0709140756u6a19c53vc1e5d4c866fbbbbe at mail.gmail.com>



Thanks.

RMS:
"Microsoft's aim, in the deal with Novell, was to make people scared to 
run GNU/Linux without paying Microsoft for permission. That is why we 
designed GPLv3 to make it backfire."

Contract logic bombing seems a little petty, and getting involved with 
SCO anything seems like a complete waste of time, but it's an 
interesting ploy.

I have zero problems with Stallman pushing toward a complete, 
competitive free software stack.  That doesn't mean that I would make 
and sell proprietary software for some period of time.  It all depends 
on the motivation, investment, business strategy, etc.  Even when I do, 
I have a long term plan to open source / free source everything.  To not 
do so means for work to, eventually, be completely wasted.  When a 
product is no longer (or never was) viable enough to support a business 
that provides growth, it should be open sourced for a possible second 
life of some type.

sdw

Lion Kimbro wrote:
>> Stallman was way more than a "moving force".  He had some key insights
>> and was able to get some major things built, organized, and held
>> together long enough to get traction.  None of this would have happened
>> without gcc for instance.  Emacs was a major contributor, although in
>> the age of Eclipse most people wouldn't know that.  Duplicating all the
>> key utilities of Unix in a sane way, including Bison/Flex, was really
>> key.  Before GNU, even cpio wasn't portable.  I was just reminded of
>> that when I was trying to cpio some data to an up-to-date Cray X1E: it
>> is Irix based and has the old broken cpio that cannot interoperate with
>> other byte orders, etc.
>>
>> Stallman's rhetoric needs lots and lots of polishing, interpreting, and
>> something close to compromise.  He has however been mostly right about
>> GPL issues up to now.  His points are all pretty valid.  He is certainly
>> a purist, which is good for all of us, but you can't only drink from
>> that well in the real world.  The "Open Source" offshoot from "Free
>> Software" has been healthy and good for participation, even if messy.
>>
>> Still, Stallman usually has a point.  I'll have to go parse everything
>> to see if he's really senile this time.  I doubt it.
>>     
>
>   +1 sdw
>
>   I read the rms interview, and, *as usual,* not a single thing
>   has changed in his message.
>
>   And, *as usual,* this infuriates people, who don't share the
>   values, and recite, "Don't talk to ME about values;  This is
>   only about the best tool for the job."  (And they deserve to
>   be heard, because they have enormous, though not total,
>   responsibility, for the success of Linux and the Open Source
>   / Free Software movement.)
>
>   If anything has changed, it must be us.
>
>   Has anything changed?  I remember people getting mad
>   whenever rms spoke in the past, as well.
>
>   It's like:  "Kuro5hin is dying."
> _______________________________________________
> FoRK mailing list
> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
>   

-- 
swilliams at hpti.com http://www.hpti.com Per: sdw at lig.net http://sdw.st
Stephen D. Williams 703-371-9362C 703-995-0407Fax 20147 AIM: sdw


-- 
swilliams at hpti.com http://www.hpti.com Per: sdw at lig.net http://sdw.st
Stephen D. Williams 703-371-9362C 703-995-0407Fax 20147 AIM: sdw


More information about the FoRK mailing list