Slashdot Mirror
Gnome Preliminary Election Results In
makapuf writes "First results of Gnome Board elections have been issued. They include some well known gnome hackers, Miguel & others, along with Tesla Gwyne, but RMS has not been elected. Remember this is only temporary and see the results on Gnotices. You can see RMS' responses of the application form."
was that of the 11 people who voted and who have gnu.org email addresses only 2 people, including RMS, voted for RMS.
Not that this necessarily means anything particularly significant, I have no idea about what having a gnu.org email address means for a start, it's just vaguely interesting.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
Serious enough to stop trying to patent code? Serious enough to ensure that all software comes with source on disc? Serious enough that you or I can have access to the language codes which drive our printers?
The world has moved backwards in respect of free software. Ironically this is largely RMS's fault, AFAICS. His irritating manner has almost totally destroyed any respect for his ideas on free software, ideas which are valuable.
The world hasn't stopped needing RMS's vision, it just really needs a new RMS.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
Time will tell if this is a good thing. Perhaps the per-company limit should have been lower (two or three), so that some other companies would have been represented on the board. The current member's affiliations probably do not mirror a large part of the GNOME community.
It's a pity that noone from Sun got elected.
I think it would have been more interesting to have at least 1 representative for Sun instead of yet another ximian guy or Telsa Gwynne (despite all the sympathy I may have for her and her husband).
I wonder if this election is going to have any impact on gnome2 for Solaris, the use of bonobo or gtk in OPenoffice.org etc.
Or possibly, they're seeing it, and they don't think it's important.
In general, never assume that the reason people don't think things are important is because they don't understand them. Years of evolution has given us a sense of proportion which means that the mass of people is almost never wrong about what's worth bothering with. That's why turnout is so low in Presidential elections.
-- the most controversial site on the Web
If he's that determined to run GNOME his way (e.g. into the ground just like Hurd), he's perfectly entitled to fork the code, but I seriously doubt many people would bother to use it.
In fact GNOME needs to sweep some of the politics aside and encourage pragmatism. Getting usable code out the door and being able to run it anywhere is the best way it's likely to increase its mindshare.
Funny this should come up. I was just thinking to myself earlier this evening about rms, the nature of free software, and his "political baggage".
Here's my feelings: rms is a brilliant technologist. His software (namely emacs and gcc) is used by millions and have become the default tools of an entire industry. The original emacs (written in TECO for ITS) was the first editor of it's type- full-screen, modeless, expandable. A groundbreaking piece of software. Life without gcc is unthinkable.
As a social engineer- a man attempting to create a change in society, he has been very successful. Certainly on the very short list of computer programmers seeking and successfully creating social change. He defined free software. Even if you prefer to call it Open Source (as I very often do. it's easier to explain, I think). Many if not most people who run Linux and (free|net|open)BSD agree that making software free can provide more value to the user, and in the long run, the programming community, than the type of proprietary software that became prevalent in the commercial software industry.
As a Man With A Mission, he's brought hundreds of thousands of people (if not millions) around to his point of view. Whether they know it or not. Certainly, his aim to re-create the free software-oriented environment of the AI Lab/ITS community has succeeded beyond all imagination. He received the McCarther Foundation's Genius award, and those aren't just bandied about.
Free software (built on Linux and other free OS's) have reinvigorated a form of hobbyist computing that had almost completely disappeared by the late 80's, early 90's. For me and millions of others, free software has made computing a fun hobby again. How can you be a hobbyist with nothing to tinker with? Proprietary software is boring.
He gave us the GPL. The GPL is a brilliant legal document and a revolutionary manifesto at the same time. It's simple. It's elegant. Even a non-lawyer can understand it (something you can't say about the typical EULA that comes with windows, etc.) And it has provided a firm foundation for a free software movement. You can tell its working by how much MS hates it. It "breaks the virtuous cycle" of commercial companies building proprietary systems out of free developer's effort. Also, the GPL is the basis for free software companies like Red Hat, Mandrake, et al. Linus' first release of Linux was "for non-commercial use only". The GPL changed his mind.
Even if you're a BSD/X11 license enthusiast, you should know that rms was instrumental in getting the BSD developers to re-implement the proprietary/AT&T-owned pieces of BSD 4.3. Their efforts became the basis for all the open source BSD's.
Some of the credit for these breakthroughs and successful developments goes fairly to rms. If not as the direct player in all of it, then as a prime mover, inspirer, definer, prophet.
Yes prophet. And like the old testament prophets of old, a "A prophet is not without honor except in his own country, among his own relatives, and in his own house." No one likes a prophet. Typically, they are scruffy, ill-kempt, and wild-eyed. They speak harsh truths no one wants to hear. They shake things up. People hope they'll just go away.
The question of whether a prophet is right- is a different one. But no one can deny the effect of a prophet on his community. We're rms's community and the truth is he doesn't get a lot of respect here.
Why? I've heard some say it's because of his "pedantic semantics" and "politcal baggage". Well, I can't disagree with them. Specifically the issue of his calling Linux, GNU/Linux (and in the emacs configure script: lignux) lost rms a lot of political capital. The Linux community didn't want to hear him tell them that all their wonderful work (and it was wonderful. even back in '96 or so when this issue first came up) was dependent on the efforts of him and the FSF. And that they wanted credit.
The disagreement on Open Source and Free Software was similar. Pragmatists liked open source as it is easier to explain, and not so scarey to the proprietary companies who they wanted on-board. rms' politics and insistence on freedom as the essence of free software is scarey. cf. my bit on prophets. :) But to give him credit, that brand of anarchist
radicalism is important- I don't think Linux would have happened the way
it has if it wasn't rms' inspirational message.
Hmmm. This rant has turned into apoligism for rms. And rms needs no apologies. He's given us a lot. Probably, more than we'd like, or feel comfortable with.
Although I personally am a tremendous advocate for free software (and even open source), I can't endorse rms' beliefs that proprietary software is by its nature immoral. I think it has a lot of disadvantages. I think free software is better for user's b/c they have a choice about how it gets developed. I think its better for developers b/c it gives us a common store of accumulated wisdom and solutions on which to build new software. But I won't say that proprietary software is evil and those who write it are at best dupes. I feel like people pay the rent however they can, and it is still much easier to do that writing closed source software. Will it be true in the future? Maybe. I don't know. But I'm not going to make it into a moral judgement.
I didn't vote on the Gnome Foundation's board. I don't follow gnome's development really, so I didn't think it was right to involve myself. Would I have voted for rms? I don't know. As I've probably made clear, I admire the man and his work. He was an important factor in starting the Gnome project at its beginning. On the other hand, I think developments like the (purported) adaption of Gnome by Sun for Solaris could be very important to its future. rms probably doesn't like it. so, perhaps his losing is the right thing to have happened for gnome's future.
but I think its not right to celebrate his loss. certainly not to label him as a fool or a dinosaur as I've seen some linux-ites do. not only is it ungrateful, but it's foolish to label your fore-fathers as fools. What does that say about those who've followed in his tracks?
cheers, jem.
--
Global Village Idiot
Email: jem@sunsite^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hmetalab^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hibi