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."

Comments

Urgh

[Anonymous DWord]

It's actually Telsa Gwynne. Close though. :)

Why gee, that's a surprise ...

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

"... but RMS has not been elected"

RMS has acted as a intolerant stubborn donkey for so long with regard to software that he isn't taken seriously anymore. Even the FSF are getting really tired of him now.

Don't get me wrong, his strong opinions *were* the right attitude when free software was something of a novelty, when the business world was taking the few free software people for lunatics. But that was years ago. Now the world at large at least takes free software seriously, and Stallman has become as useful as a fire hydrant in the middle of a bike trail.

Re:Why gee, that's a surprise ...

[Anonymous Coward]

as useful as a fire hydrant in the middle of a bike trail.

What kind of analogy is that? I'd say RMS is more of a one-legged cat trying to bury turds on a frozen lake....

Re:Why gee, that's a surprise ...

[Muggins the Mad]

> Now the world at large at least takes free software seriously, and Stallman has become as useful as a fire hydrant in the middle of a bike trail.

I must disagree with you here. Stallman, or at least his strong views on the purity of free software are needed more than ever.

Now people are recognising some of the benefits of available source code, they're not seeing the important difference between open source and free software (in GNU terms). And it's all being confused. People are going around thinking that just because it's publically developed, it's free.

We need the FSF as much as we always have, as a voice pointing out why the "viral" clause in the GPL is so important, and why the BSD license gives developers more freedom but doesn't necessarily transfer it to the end users.

- MugginsM

Re:Why gee, that's a surprise ...

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

"his strong views on the purity of free software are needed more than ever"

Okay, so take the example of the Linux kernel : it started as a project from a brilliant programmer geek for brilliant programmer geeks : RMS' message isn't very useful here (because of the small specialized audience) but I admit that it might be.

Then, Linux grew bigger and started to show-up on company radars (namely Novell) : when Linux was at that point, RMS was key to keeping it from being taken over by rapacious companies. Linus also said many times that the GPL was a natural choice. So I say bravo RMS : directly or indirectly, he kept Linux independent, and he still does.

Now, Linux has reached a critical mass : companies have vested interests in it, too many people have given time and effort to make it better, or simply to use it in solutions, it's not going to be adulterated by business thugs anymore. Nobody is going to take it over today. Does it need RMS' unbudgeable attitude to keep it safe ? heck no. What Linux needs now is $$$, and a steering committee able to make balanced decisions for the good of geeks as well as suits. At this point, RMS just drives businesses away, and even Linus admits that he steers clears of him for similar reasons (it's written in his book, quite bluntly).

I'm a programmer, I maintain open-source projects, and because I used to be a hot-headed teenage geek long ago, I still feel a pang of disgust in my stomack when I hear or read about businesses doing this or that with the information that wants to be free. But I'm old(er) now, and what my head tells me differs from what my stomack does : at some point in every major OSS project, businesses have to bring in cash to keep the ball going. It might feel disgusting, but it's the truth. RMS' head thinks the exact same way his stomack does, and that's stupid.

"We need the FSF as much as we always have, as a voice pointing out why the "viral" clause in the GPL is so important, and why the BSD license gives developers more freedom but doesn't necessarily transfer it to the end users"

You're 100% right, we need the FSF. But there is a major difference between the FSF and RMS : they acknowledge the importance of the business world, even if they don't often shout it out loud, and they strive to work with them *and* keep the spirit of the GPL intact, which is why they drafted the GPL 3.0 that Stallman hates so much, and why they try to distance themselves from Stallman.

Re:Why gee, that's a surprise ...

[nagora]

Now the world at large at least takes free software seriously

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

Re:Why gee, that's a surprise ...

[Get Behind the Mule]

I must disagree with you here. Stallman, or at least his strong views on the purity of free software are needed more than ever.

... and so on and so forth, but your post just keeps asserting that these things are all so important, without explaining why.

Sure it's a Good Thing that the FSF exists, and of course RMS deserves respect for the dogged exercise of his rights (as everybody always says nowadays). And if he and others like him can convince more people, then more power to 'em. But a lot of us know and understand the message, are not terribly convinced by it, and aren't planning on doing anything particular to promote it in the foreseeable future. In the marketplace of ideas, you win some and you lose some.

Incidentally, since you're evidently a supporter of the FSF and the free software concept, I'd like to advise you, probably for the umpteenth time, that RMS is an extremely poor ambassador for your cause. Let's once and for all be rid of the canard that it's everybody else's fault, because we're all just too lily-livered to cope with someone who is so strongly dedicated. RMS could be just as passionate without being such an insufferable jackass. It is possible to take a strong, principled stance, and nevertheless have some skills at diplomacy and just generally getting along with people. RMS's fans try to redefine his weaknesses as strengths, but that's just an argument born out of desperation, not to mention sheer baloney. He has simply failed to learn some lessons that his mother and kindergarten teacher should have taught him, and it is extremely damaging to the free software cause.

Re:Why gee, that's a surprise ...

[Paladin128]

But I'm old(er) now, and what my head tells me differs from what my stomack does : at some point in every major OSS project, businesses have to bring in cash to keep the ball going. It might feel disgusting, but it's the truth. RMS' head thinks the exact same way his stomack does, and that's stupid.

That's the way it is now, but not the way it has to be. At some point in the future, if the world abandoned propretary software, and all software available was free (as in speech), corporate backing wouldn't be necessary. Why would we need the help of the industry if there were no proprietary file formats or network protocols to reverse engineer or sign NDA's for.

Sure, interaction with business on some level is necessary (businesses offereing tech support, etc.), but good software will happen with or without industry if it is universally accepted. And yes, we can still all get paid doing custom development for different companies (everything from web sites to customized POS systems). Stallman has said for years that that if the world consisted of all free software, we could still get paid, but not as much.

Please note I am not arguing whether these cases are good or bad, I'm simply arguing alternative scenarios that others had presented.

Re:Why gee, that's a surprise ...

[sydb]

In the past, pro-MS posters would generally get moderated down and flamed, whilst pro-Linux posters would generally get moderated up.

At the same time, a vocal minority would complain about this lack of balance. Fair enough.

But now, the pendulum has swung the other way. Fully. Now the balance is against linux and Free Software. You are part of the vocal majority.

I'd rather have NONE of the flaming and trolling, the karma-whoring and bigotry on EITHER side.

I came to Slashdot for intelligent discussion, about technical news and, specifically, about Free Software related happenings. The site has ALWAYS had a Free Software slant. Just because it's not written in lights at the top of page doesn't change that; but remember that Slashdot is part of the OSDN: Open Source Developers Network. "Open Source" may not be a drop-in replacement for "Free Software" but near as dammit. But it's not solely about Free Software, and I welcome that, and I don't troll or flame people talking about Microsoft products; in fact I try not to troll or flame anyone. If someone puts up an opinion, it's an invitation to a discussion, but most people here don't want to discuss, they just want to score points.

Your kind and many more like you make me want to go elsewhere.

Elections

[loraksus]

However, RMS has demanded a recount in 13 counties, claiming that media bias that he is not a team player has offset the public's perception of him, and thus cost him the election.
Reports have come from a source close to Stallman saying that he is stomping up and down his office and muttering " No? NO!?!!? I invented the fuckin' GUI!!"

More at 10.

Re:Elections

[Lunastorm]

Don't you mean, GNU/GUI?

I was confused...

[x136]

...I think I accidentally voted for Pat Buchanan!

What I found vaguely interesting

[Chuck Chunder]

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.

Re:What I found vaguely interesting

[Russ Nelson]

The FSF has given out gnu.org mailing addresses like pretty girls at parades give out candy. I've got one, if I chose to use it. nelson with the domain of gnu.org gets to me.
-russ

Domination by a few companies

[amorsen]

In retrospect the protection against company dominations could have been stronger. Of those elected:

4 are employed by Ximian
3 are employed by RedHat
3 are without affiliation
1 is employed by Compaq

As it is, Ximian and RedHat together have almost 2/3 of the seats. Both are respectable and honourable companies and I am sure that they will try to keep the viewpoints of the whole GNOME community in mind when they decide issues, but it is hard for them to represent important GNOME backers such as Sun Microsystems.

One can hope that the GNOME Board will consult with the greater community when they are facing important issues. They could invite people with different affiliations as non-voting guests for select meetings, perhaps.

Board dominated by Ximian and Red Hat

[Florian Weimer]

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.

yeah right

[streetlawyer]

Now people are recognising some of the benefits of available source code, they're not seeing the important difference between open source and free software

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.

Re:FUCK RMS

[Anonymous DWord]

Here's his application, just in case you're curious: http://nm.debian.org/nmstatus.php?email=rms%40gnu. org

Application Manager Assigned: jordi assigned on 2001-11-25

The following things need to happen still:

• ID to be checked by AM
• Philosophy and Procedures to be checked by AM.
• Tasks and Skills to be checked by AM.
• Your Application Manager will put their approval to the DAM.
• DAM to approve application
• DAM creates new account

Re:Graphical network object model environment.

[sydb]

Gnome advocates will tell you of the plight of the pore shareware author who must develop his nifty new application for Gnome as the competing desktop is built on a GPLed library.

Which Gnome advocates? I'm a Gnome advocate (Use Gnome!), but I would never say "Because it's great for shareware authors!", even though it in fact is.

Have a look at the Gnome web site.

Tell you what, I'll save you a mouse click. Some quotes:

GNOME is part of the GNU project, and is free software

The GNOME project was born as an effort to create an entirely free desktop environment for free systems.

The GNOME project was the first to provide a fully free desktop environment for Unix-like systems. Free Software is about empowering users, and about granting them rights over the software they use. With Free Software, the user gets a number of rights:

• The right to use the software.
  
  
• The right to redistribute the software: if you have a piece of free software, you can share this software with other people (no license fees are required).
  
  
• The right to learn from the software.
  
  
• The right to alter the software (all source code, data files, images are included). For example, users can improve it, extend it, trim it down, fix problems, learn or experiment.
  
  
• The right to redistribute your modified versions of the software. This means that once you have made changes to the software, you can distribute these changes to your friends, customers or anyone else.
  

These rights and freedoms are at the core of the GNOME project. The side effects of Free Software are that the software tends to be of very high quality, it evolves very rapidly, problems are fixed quickly, and in general the system is better both for the user and the developer.

Now stop trolling, understand what you are talking about before you open your underinformed cakehole.

Re:Gnome is RUDE to turn him away now.

[DrXym]

Turning copyright over to the FSF doesn't mean that RMS is entitled to charge in like in a bull in a chinashop. If he wants to control within a project it must be with the consent of the maintainers, in this case the GNOME contributors. If this case, there was a vote, the other candidates were better and he didn't get in.

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.