Slashdot Mirror
Stallman Clarifies Position RE:Gnome & .Net
RMS ? has sent The Register an email in which he corrects their 'inaccurate' representation of his stance on the GNOME & .NET issue. He states, "I am pretty sure something was garbled in the quotation which has me asking Miguel to 'explain himself to us', because those words would be
explicitly confrontational, and I did not have any wish to do that."
RMS "explicitly confrontational?" Surely you jest!
;-)
those words would be explicitly confrontational, and I did not have any wish to do that.
Uhm, RMS...since when do you not wish to be confrontational? Your whole approach is confrontational.
Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
Wow, this is turning into a ping-pong match.
You have to wonder how much relevant information is lost before a story makes it to press these days. Partial quotes, reassembled sentences, poor fact checking. This is meant to address the media in general, not this article specifically.
We need a newspaper/website that quotes people word for word rather than just the highlights, and always sends two reporters to cover a job separately. Not that it will ever happen but I bet we'd have a considerably different view of world events if it happened.
is the road of destruction. Icaza is either a fool or a sellout for getting in bed with Microsoft.
One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
> "GNOME is part of the GNU project, and is free software
> (some times referred to as open source software.)"
I take that to be saying that "free software" is not equivalent to "open source" software, although sometimes it is referred to that way.
No, he is not lying.
The "free software movement" based upon the
GPL, LGPL, GFDL etc. and started by GNU is
very different from the Open Source movement
started by Bruce Evans?
Anyway, the latter you can inform you about
at http://opensource.org
The former at http://www.fsf.org
FSF is the Free Software Foundation, which is
the nowadays' head of the GNU project, the
GNU licenses and non-GNU projects that are
under the [L]GPL and hosted by them but do not
belong to the GNU project as a whole.
RMS is head of the GNU project and the FSF,
so I think he is right to decide which direction
the GNU project follows, although I am not, in
my PERSONAL opinion, happy with this line.
Take the Gnu Compiler Collection (GCC) as an
example: http://gcc.gnu.org
The Copyright lines in the Copyleft license
(sigh!) refer to the FSF as owner.
If you want any of your changes be committed
into gcc you MUST transfer your copyright on
these changes to the FSF, which then, in turn,
incorporates them under the current GPL (or LGPL,
for example in the glibc, but I don't know if
this practice is there, too).
These are because then the FSF can be sure that
no third party copyright owner can claim anything
about such core projects as the gcc. For example,
if the GPL would prove invalid in court, the FSF
would change the GCC license from one day to
another to a protective one.
As I said, *personally* I am no GNU fan and do
use a modificated MIT/X/BSD license for my projects,
but on the other hand I am glad that RMS started
things such as the gcc that early.
Credits to whom credits belong.
My Karma isn't excellent, damn it! (And
RMS has never been confrontational. But he has always stood his ground.
Unfortunately many "nutbags" seem unable to understand the difference.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
First, check your spelling.
Then point those "internal things" out.
Third, are you really aware of the difference
between "Open Source" - http://opensource.org
and "Free Software" - http://www.fsf.org
The current licenses used by the free software
movement (GPL, LGPL, GFDL etc.) are, as long
as they refer to software and not, for example,
documentation (as the GFDL), are "OSI Compliant
Open Source" with regards to the open source
definition, and so free software qualifies as
open source.
That the OSI is not approving non-software
licenses is really a pity.
My Karma isn't excellent, damn it! (And
The very existence of GNOME is the direct result of our ideals of freedom, precisely what the open source movement was founded in 1998 to reject.
:)
So open source rejects your ideals of freedom, and has done since its foundation?
Someone better notify the press
Henry
i don't do sigs. oops.
He can criticize any particular GNU project
because he leads the GNU project as a whole.
Be content with it or not, but you can't
change the facts.
Of course you can fork, the [L]GPL allows this.
Please note, as you can read from my other
comments on this, I am no GPL fan either.
My Karma isn't excellent, damn it! (And
"...those words would be explicitly confrontational, and I did not have any wish to do that."
;)
right... rms has never been known to be confrontational.
He's not. If you bothered to read the article you'd see that someone told RMS that Miguel wanted to change the licence of Gnome to the X11 licence. RMS said he would not like that and that he did not belive Miguel would do that.
If "RMS" would be a topic(TM), you could
filter it in your preferences page.
Anyways, you can just filter GNU.
Oh wait... you aren't logged in?
D'oh.
My Karma isn't excellent, damn it! (And
A hell of a lot more than whiners like you. GNU/Linux is a highly functional system. Linux without GNU won't even compile. For balance it should also be noted that GNU without Linux is no fun.
Oh, I dunno, gcc 3.0, maybe? Or GNOME?
Do the obvious to e-mail me.
How about (3) "Karma Sucks" is unable to parse the English language?
Gnome is part of the GNU project... True.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
They are not equivalent, but:
* Free Software is OSI approved Open Source
* the FSF approved documentation (GFDL)
is NOT because OSI doesn't approve
documentation licenses (a pity).
My Karma isn't excellent, damn it! (And
I actually have a few issues to address regarding the Register's report...
.NET framework -
.NET technology specifically for GNOME. As we all know, that is far from the case... While this involves a quite obvious conflict of interest for M$ as a corporation (industry acceptance of .NET -vs- inadvertently providing Linux w/ new technology), I wouldn't say that M$ has been overly cooperative!!!
.NET including SmartClients and the new Microsoft security model. ®"
First, I would like to raise the question of exactly where it is that I can view de Icaza's comments.
"Miguel de Icaza has issued his own clarification, here, which also amounts to 'move along folks, there's nothing to see'."
Unfortunately, however, the good people at the Register neglected to actually link the here in that statement! Anyone have any ideas???
Next, I move to a quote the Register supplies from de Icaza regarding the
".NET is a fantastic technology upgrade for GNOME from Microsoft,"
Perhaps it's just me, perhaps it is the fault of the translation, but in this quote it sounds to me as if de Icaza is portraying Microsoft as having graciously created the
And finally, I point to the final line of the article referencing comments by de Icaza -
"In the interview, he praised many aspects of
Please...someone say it ain't so!!! Is this individual actually praising the evil empire's security model? Has he been smoking dope!!! I think I'll just forget that I saw that and move on as if nothing ever happened...
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. -- Benjamin Franklin
I do have to admit that the "Oh, I didn't really mean Gnome should be based on .NET" was amusing, though. The email making that statement and then describing why it would be a good idea anyways was great.
Ah well, Ximian will get to write one program and sell to the Windows and Linux markets, which is the entire point of Mono to begin with. (Anthing else is just justification for this common sense business decision.)
.technomancer
Things like this belong into the .sig, too.
Meta-Slashdot thread found in CmdrTaco's
Journal (IIRC).
Check my
My Karma isn't excellent, damn it! (And
If you hold a gun to the head of someone to force them to turn over the rights to what there making, that dosent mean that you created it.
Miguel's response to this controversy appeased a lot of my concerns about what they actually want do do with Mono, and especially his apparent admiration for Microsoft's stuff (he likes .Net, but still thinks everything that came before it is garbage). While I still disagree with his fetish for next-gen APIs over designing an actual desktop (which KDE seems much farther along with), at least he doesn't appear to be selling out to M$ as readily as it first seemed.
So BSDers never have fun?
From http://www.gnome.org: GNOME is part of the GNU project, and is free software (some times referred to as open source software.) It's a GNU project. RMS is the leader/founder of GNU. He's the president of the FSF. He may not be polished, or a politican, but he's their leader.
Do the obvious to e-mail me.
The problem is that the Open Source Initiative would like to redefine common usage words to fit their particular meaning.
open source (no caps, no initiative) obviously implies that the source is open, or that you are able to see it. Nothing more, nothing less. With gnome you can see the source and tinker with it if you want.. its open source.. anyone that says otherwise is a dumbass.
Now, that's a good question. I would think not. Italics is used on Slashdot-stories when quoting what the users contribute - and the text not italicized is the poster's comment on that. As such, it would be confusing to make RMS' quote in italics. IMHO.
I don't see a contradiction. The fact that some people refer to some free software as "open source" doesn't imply that all open source software is free software.
Oooh baby, the release of wget version 1.8 and then 1.8.1 in December was great! I think wget is more than enough to justify the existance of the entire Free Software Foundation. No, really. I'll donate to the FSF if someone keeps maintaining wget and makes it rock even more.
He was misquoted, and he straightened it out. It is amazing how many letters I have read in magazines from RMS, because they violated the gpl, or called gnu/linux linux, or whatever. I've gotta hand it to him, he doesnt take bull from anyone..
Sometimes I guess. It depends on the devils form.
e4 e5
"I'm a slashdot troll, who never has to worry about being misquoted because no one would bother quoting me, so I'll attack RMS for being misquoted because he's a nice easy target, and it's easier to destroy than create."
Preach on Brother! From this gospel flows EMACS, GnuProlog, GCC, Bash and other mighty intellectual victuals.
e4 e5
Comment removed based on user account deletion
But what part of the GNU toolkit commonly used by groups like RedHat/Linux, Slackware/Linux, Debian/Linux[1] diddnt exist a decade ago.
IFF (that is: if, and only if) someone actualy produces a GNU/FSF distribution of linux will it make sence to use 'GNU/Linux'
Not exactly. It's "OSI Certified Open Source Software". "OSI Certified" is the modifier, "Open Source Software" is the noun. Sorry that we don't approve non-software licenses, but we have to draw the line somewhere. We had somebody ask us to approve a license for a movie a year or so ago!
-russ
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
Well, they have been updated and refined since then. Linux existed 10 years ago too. I don't see anyone saying that we shouldn't pay attention to Linus.
IFF (that is: if, and only if) someone actualy produces a GNU/FSF distribution of linux will it make sence to use 'GNU/Linux'
So why do you call it Linux instead of say Unix-clone? The kernel is a pretty minor part of a system. Sure, it is neccesary, but so are the GNU parts.
It's no big secret that I don't like Stallman.... however, he's had some good ideas and he gave us the GPL, one of the most useful pieces of software of the last 20 years (yes, contracts are software too!)
So why is it that he continually manages to irritate so many people? I think the answer is, you have to think a lot like RMS in order to understand what he's saying... particularly on the first try. As a result, he's prone to miscommunication. He appears confrontational because he frequently speaks his mind in a way that's going to get misinterpreted by everyone else. So is it our fault for not understanding his 'great mind'?
I don't think so. Richard, if you'd just have some respect for other people's 'user interfaces', you'd have a lot fewer problems, and do the community a whole world of good. RMS is not 'intuitive' or 'user friendly' for most of the world. Understanding how people communicate is critical to building effective interfaces to software. It's even more critical as a tool of persuasion. The Free Software community, like it or not, has a public face now, and you're it. Do you really want to keep hurting the community you built?
I can see many people hates RMS.
So many comments and so many marked as -1, troll, offtopic, or flamebait...
Get a life, people.
What RMS thinks is HIS opinion, and he has the right to express his opinion.
Isn't America about freedom?
Okay, I'll call you out. Which of RMS's four freedoms is not present in any OSI-approved license?
-russ
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
Once again, The Register screws up and misrepresents the truth as some sensationalistic trash. Why am I not surprised? They can't just sit back and admit they made a mistake putting up that article and try to blame it on some other tech site. And they go on to try and demonize Miguel de Icaza a bit more at the bottom! Come on guys, what ever happened to fact checking and journalistic integrity? You wrote the article, you didn't check your facts, you were in the wrong. Admit it.
Hah. The day The Register posts an honest retraction and admits they made a mistake without trying to weasel out of it is the day satan drives to work in a snowplow.
I honestly can't believe the amount of crap Miguel gets, based on The Register's blatant misreporting of the truth. It's time people stopped going after leaders like Miguel and after the people who profiteer from turning the community on itself.
All opinions expressed are opinions. Duh.
Debian/Linux[1]
It's Debian GNU/Linux, as named by its creators. Please respect our right to name our distribution as we like.
IFF (that is: if, and only if) someone actualy produces a GNU/FSF distribution of linux will it make sence to use 'GNU/Linux'
The FSF supported Debian GNU/Linux in the beginning. While we are no longer formally a FSF project, we still regard the FSF as a respected "friend", and attempt to work with them whenever possible.
Regardless of what movement Stallman is the head of and which GNOME is associated with, it is in fact completely correct to refer to it as an open source project. There is a reason the Open Source Initiative couldn't get a trademark, because the phrase "open source" is in common usage. And in that common usage it completely and accurately describes GNOME.
It looks like (s)he's posting from lynx. It might help if (s)he put the tags round his text, thus aiding legibility.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
It continues to amaze me over and over, how uninformed people attack Richard Stallman not substantively, but personally - attacking the way he looks, the way he talks, but never substantively refuting what he says. It amazes me even more, how these ad hominem attacks get up-modded. Apparently there is a lot of hatred out there for people of principle.
/. "community"). But it was precisely his unyielding, principled approach to software development that made the GNU project succeed in the end, despite the odds.
Well let's first get some facts straight. No one who uses GNU/Linux or any of the related free or open source software built on the Gnu/Linux platform would be enjoying the use of this stuff if it wasn't for Richard Stallman. In the mid-80s when he decided to rebuild Unix from scratch, all my geek and hacker friends who were Unix users at the time, thought he was totally nuts (just like a good part of the
Linus Torvald, a great programmer and a man worthy of praise, finished up what Stallman had started. But he was standing on the shoulder of a giant. If Richard Stallman feels that the OS should be called GNU/Linux he is 100% justified, whether or not its an ego issue as many here contend, or an issue of principle, as he does. Either way, as the man who made it happen, he has the right to make that demand. Whether you honor it or not is your choice. But insulting him while you continue to use the fruits of his labor is worse than hypocrisy - its theft.
There is not one, not one person, in the free software or open source world who has contributed more to the existance of this stuff than Richard Stallman. So at the very least, he deserves the gratitude of anyone who uses this software, for whatever reason they might use it.
To say that Richard Stallman's radical ideas are a hindrance to the acceptance of non-proprietary alternatives is absurd. This is the guy who invented the whole concept, this is the man who made it happen. It's precisely because he is fanatical and unyielding that this movement came into being. All those willing to compromise would never have stayed the course he did.
That doesn't mean you have to accept his point of view. I personally think that in the commercial world, there is a place for BSD-style licenses, and unlike Richard Stallman I don't think these are immoral.
Nonetheless I feel tremendous gratitude for what he has done and continues to do, I respect and admire his principled approach to his work and his life. I strongly resent the ungrateful, spiteful, empty-headed sniping that gets thrown his way in this forum. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you!
Woops, the tags got lost, of course! Yes, I should have previewed...
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
Oops, sorry for my misquoting.
As to the non-software-not-certifying,
I asked why not to replace "software" by
"work" in the thread about redesigning parts
of the OSD, and got answered this.
That's why I asked, because I was rejected.
(I do the replace in my variant of the X.net)
My Karma isn't excellent, damn it! (And
I have a great deal of respect for Stallman and laud his accomplishments on the behalf of free software. I have read many quotes (some lengthy) by him, however, and cannot characterize them as anything less than confrontational. His remarks also tend to have a sanctimonious tone. In this vein, I once saw an interesting photograph of Stallman, one that I am sure was taken and distributed with his consent. The photo showed a glowing halo over Stallman's head and his affecting the posture of a saint.
A lawyer & digital forensics examiner. Also an expert on open source software (OSS).
Yes, but compare with what I said, and you won't
find major differences.
Note that _any_ free software is open source as
to the OSD (http://opensource.org/docs/definition.html).
I didn't say it was incorrect.
My Karma isn't excellent, damn it! (And
Notice the direction of the arrow? (Do you even know what the arrow means btw? Take a maths class..)
Don't forget the tendency of this community to interpret everything he says in as negative a way as possible.
If he disagrees with something, everyone starts screaming about he's a ranting ideologue who's bent on coercing everyone to follow his ideals. It doesn't matter how he phrases it, it's immediately translated by the anti-RMS crowd into some kind of insane crusade against whatever he's talking about.
Look at the current incident. Someone asks him a question that's based on faulty assumptions. He points out that the questioner might have some of his facts wrong, then says if they were right he'd disagree with it. Instantly the anti-RMS crowd comes out en masse, shrieking.
What's next? RMS order soup with his dinner, and we get the slashdot headline "RMS blasts salad as entree choice"?
I'm not sure why there's such a huge anti-RMS movement in the free software/open source communities. I have some theories though:
1. Stallman has the audacity not to uncritically support everything everyone else does in the open source arena.
2. He represents an older generation of programmers who did the real pioneering stuff, and young programmers today have self-esteem problems with recognizing anyone older than themselves.
3. They don't like his political views.
You didn't write the Linux kernel nor any GNU tool, so why are you whining? You're still using GNU stuff, aren't you? If you are so fed up with GNU, why don't you install FreeBSD instead? Either way, stop whining.
Gnome joined the GNU Project. The GNU project is lead by RMS. This is doesn't happen automatically by using the GPL. You have to do that actively. If you do that, then of course the project leader gets a piece of the action. I mean, it's Gnome which is a part of the GNU Project, not the other way around. If the Gnome people doesn't like this, they can bail out of the GNU Project.
Obviously the Gnome people saw a benefit in joining the GNU project. No one was forced to do it.
My point is that RMS/FSF/GNU has, under there own roof, produced negligable amounts of usefull code in the last decade.
Yes. It's your moot point. You have nothing to say about this. And I get pissed of every time people attack the FSF for no f*cking reason. Everything is done be free will. Let the Gnome people which actually DO something, decide whether FSF/GNU project is a good thing or not. You just have a problem with RMS (what I don't know, and I don't care).
I myself prefer BSD license before GPL, but I still respect the GPL, FSF and RMS. I don't have to stick a GPL on my code, I don't have to join the GNU project, and I don't have to give my copyright to the FSF. Know why? Because I'm free NOT do it, and RMS is not forcing me.
RMS has never been confrontational.
You mean like that time he tore a reporter a new asshole for using the term "Linux"?
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
GNU was meant to be an operating system. An operating system is composed of a kernel, and then supporting software.
What you are using is most likely some distribution that includes the GNU binutils, libc, and tons of other GNU tools. It also contains the Linux kernel. All together, there is likely more code on your PC that belongs to the GNU project than to the Linux project. Therefore, it only makes sense to call the operating system you use, GNU/Linux. No one is making the argument that Linux should be referred to as GNU/Linux, just that the operating system which is composed chiefly of the Linux kernel and GNU utilites should properly be referred to as GNU/Linux.
Linux wouldn't compile with Intel c++ and it surely would not be 30% faster. The linux kernel hackers choose GCC because they knew exactly how it produced code. Linux is highly optimized to produce the best possible code from GCC, and in spots where performance is key, the code is written in assembly.
Porting Linux to Intel c++ would do nothing, especially since Linux is written in C and the 30% figure comes from many of the patented optimizations that Intel owns for C++. Has nothing to do with C.
If you went from Emacs to KWrite, you obviously never knew how to use Emacs properly because no one in their right mind would switch from Emacs to KWrite.
The fact of the matter is that Linux as you know it is more of a GNU project than a Linux project. The kernel is not terribly big or important and it no where near independent of the GNU system.
Oh, BTW, you criticism RMS because he's written Emacs, GCC, GDB, Guile, etc and you've written???
int func(int a);
func((b += 3, b));
open source vs Open Source Initiative (OSI).
Pay attention to the details. They are important. You always need to stop and figure out what people mean when they throw around the term open source. Do they just mean to imply the combined common usage of the 2 words? (ie: you can look at the source code) Or are they talking about OSI?
Tell the OpenBSD team to import Lynx-2.8.4
Ctrl-V e for editor isn't working, but I do like
to read my own posts before posting.
Ctrl-X e (in 2-8-4) does work.
My Karma isn't excellent, damn it! (And
I am not attacking the FSF. I am not saying that they are compleat tools. Im asking a resonable question: why are we paying attention to an orginization that has done nothing for us in a decade?
Cool! Look, RMS has started employing astro-turfers! Pretty soon they'll have us convinced that "GNU/Linux" doesn't sound awkward and actually is the best way to describe the OS, just like MS people have convinced everyone to pronounce it "sequal server" instead of "SQL server".
graspee
2 bit dictators also run "Open" democracies and have "Transparent" legislatures. Same with powerful rich dictators.
I remember hearing that there was some controversy in the 1930s (or so) when a presidential candidate was interviewed by a reporter. The reporter, who was a supporter of the other candidate, decided to sabotage this candidate by quoting this candidate word for word, complete with "uhhhh"s, "welllll, let me thinks", silent pauses, yawns, cracking knuckles, etc. He was made to look like an incompetent fool. He couldn't deny that he said or did all those things, but he complained bitterly that it was unfair. That made him look a whiny incompetent fool that hand something to hide.
Meanwhile, the when the reporter interviewed the candidate he supported, he wrote a beautifully airbrushed interview that made him look like a sharp faultless visionary.
I bet some idiot replies to this with some choice quotes from the jargon file/hacker's dictionary about user logins and the good old days.
I use to like the jargon file, but now it just seems to prop up clueless newbies who want to feel superior by telling everyone to use the word "cracker" instead of "hacker".
blerg.
graspee
s/use/used
What? Me, a hypocrite? No, I'm allowed.
graspee
What's next? A loss of that sexy beard?
Never mock a man's hirsute appendage. It isn't "Insightful," it isn't clever, but it does reveal one of two things:
1. You weren't mocking; you really do find RMS's beard arousing, but were disguising this truth, even from yourself, behind sarcasm.
2. You judge people based on faulty criteria.
Which is it?
Neopets - the best free game on the Int
I was wrong, so I'm now playing down my stance. :-)
That was jsut for the people not familiar with RMS who has been known to be openly confrontational.
Derek Greene
It's interesting to note that the BSD license
is the original prototype for all the follow-on
so called free or open source software. Before
BSD, it simply was not popular nor common for
companies or anyone for that matter to give away
source code, only binaries and binary modules,
which are a plain to deal with comparing to having
the source. We really need to acknowledge BSD
Unix and its role in the history of free source.
But, nice try with your 'questioning my sexuality' angle. Too bad I'm one of precious few Slashdotters who are secure in that way.
-
Inventor of the term 'pardon my French'.
There was a discussion re: Smoothwall firewall, and the founder/creator, which conincendentially just happens to be Richard (or more appropriately Dick.)
From what I've seen about both guys (it might not be true, but it is from different sources, and widely accepted.) both are abrasive and rather unpleasant. (I'm not saying they're the same, but making some observations, and using both to make a point.)
I've had some friends and acquantences, who thought the whole world was wrong. And in fact, in many ways, they're right! But the way they go about "fixing" the problem - is in itself a problem. They attack everyone. They are abrasive. They are often hypocritical. They burn their bridges, and aren't polite. They use massive shock value to make a point, often offending many, including those who might help them.
Eventually, enough people are really sick of them, and practically want to burn them at the stake (or is that steak?)!
The point is this. I like pleasant people. Pleasant people don't have to compromise their principles, or sell out. But people who are not offensive and have an inflated sence of self importance are just more effective.
RMS probbaly isn't going to change, and that's too bad. From what I can see, his actions are his own worst enemy. Same with Richard from Smoothwall. They could have lots of positive effects, but they make themselves largely ineffective.
That's just too bad.
As to the hypercritical (hyper not hypo) response to them...well what's to surprise? They offend people, and then expect an evenhanded response. Sure, it would be more fair, but I know as well as anyone else, that a fair response is not very likely.
RMS by and large, helps shape the response he gets. I assume that he knows it, and doesn't care. That's the way things go.
Cheers!
One more big difference. Richard Stallman is a genius. Richard Morrell is just a dick.
One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
Linus Torvalds says that, contrary to popular belief, he really does like shrimp, Alan Cox just got a haircut, Miguel de Icaaza is Spanish, and RMS really does want free software.
Seriously, does anybody care about a flamewar between people just because it's RMS. You don't have to be a Kreskin to know that he's gonna end up in a lot of confrontations. I'd think that Slashdot would be one of those societies where celebrity-stalking wouldn't take place.
Yes they do look better, because gives fixed width fonts, thus the lines break at roughly the same column.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
Bravo. Sensible people looking at the meanings of everyday words are few and far between in the whole OS/free software/etc. world. If there was less fussing about words and more writing of software, everyone would benefit. (Except for the few stray firebrands who thrive on publicity.)
There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
Max V.
NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
However, I still can't bring myself to think that Stallman wasn't trying to start a confrontation with GNOME. Call me a cynic. I mean, even the tone of the Register's article must have picked up the confrontational "feeling" from somewhere.
"A free replacement for Visual Basic which works with GNOME would be a major step forward; any capable team that wants to launch this project should please contact gnu@gnu.org." --RMS
Psst, Mr. Stallman sir, you've already got one: GNOME Basic.
(I don't know if he is still using that login account anymore or not, ever since MIT stopped providing guest access to those computers I've not kept track of who is logged in.)
The way people kick RMS around these days, you'd think he was JonKatz or something :)
microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
I'd live for the one, and die for the one.
The one is RMS. That's all I have to say.
These kinds of disputes are not what the community needs to stay together! It seems to me that the oss community is filled with more whiny self-righteous pigs than truly stellar and motivated programmers? Am i misguided in this assumption?
Did you not mean Sun R&D? I don't see a lot of value-add from .NET over Java, that could not easily be added to Java if it appears to be popular (like more cross language support). Perhaps if they'd done a lot more than just capitalize method names, or even added generics to get a little ahead of the Java VM... (generics coming in JDK 1.5, around 2005).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
So why is it that he continually manages to irritate so many people?
I don't know, I like the guy. But I can tell you this, someone who's phil@phil.org and who assumes that everybody knows his opinion on RMS, "It's no big secret that I don't like Stallman", now that's a little irritating.
Stallman Email says :The Open Source Initiative has the right to
define a criterion for open source and note the fact that GNOME fits it, but GNOME has no connection with them.
To the best of my knowledge the G in GNOME stands for GNU???
And geez with so much good research out there, why did Icaza have to choose a Microsoft product for a base to Gnome. Just seems to be a way to attract attention, needlessly by the way, I just think that there are great virtual machine architectures out there that could be used to implement a common runtime base for most languages.
Lastly, Richard Stallman is not only a free software activist, he is also the president to a prestigious foundation, with too much accomplished to let this PR blunder damage his reputation, so he released a nice email publicly retreating from a personal confrontation from Icaza.
But lets face it, in private he`s cursing Icaza's guts right now...damn he chose Microsoft after all....all you MSFT lovers don't bother replying, I have an affair with open source UNIX....
Broken Hearts are for Assholes. - Frank Zappa
Heh. You have a point.
Go read what he as to say about the .NET Framework, Mono and GNOME.
He also replys directly to the RMS controversy.
Wax on, wax off baby!
>If you went from Emacs to KWrite, you obviously never knew how to use Emacs properly because no one in their right mind >would switch from Emacs to KWrite.
I beg to differ on that one. I think kwrite has a clean interface and does what I want it to do...it acts like a word processor...nothing more. I can make sure I have my own opening and closing brackets, and that they're in the right spot. I don't need emacs to do it for me.
As far as the interface goes, emacs is way too unix-y for me. I like clean, crisp interfaces. I like point and click. Sure, when I'm in a terminal and don't have access to an X display, I can use emacs. But, on my home computer, I use kwrite.
...the guy's a neanderthal. He's the classic geek, lacking in maturity and social skills. These can be developed though, and along with his technical knowledge could help him rise to new heights. I suggest he read the book "Emotional Intelligence," for a start...
And lay off the hemp (it ain't just a plant, dammit).
As a result, he's prone to miscommunication. He appears confrontational because he frequently speaks his mind in a way that's going to get misinterpreted by everyone else. So is it our fault for not understanding his 'great mind'?
Not being able to understand what RMS is saying demonstrates a serious lack of verbal comprehension skills. I can't think of any frequent writer/speaker who states things more plainly than RMS.
RMS is disliked because he stands on principle and won't budge. He's misunderstood because we are living in probably the least principled time in recorded human history.
Best,
-jimbo
XML Tools for Mac OS X
RMS is one of the clearest speakers I've seen - he always goes to great pains to explain exactly what is meant by what he says - far more so than most other people - and still people manage to make him one of the most mis-quoted people around. How is that? Has nobody realised that each time someone claims he's denounced this good thing or supported that evil thing or whatever, that he can almost without fail raise his hand, point to a transcription of exactly what he said and go "No I didn't - look!"?
"...A free replacement for Visual Basic which works with GNOME would be a major step forward; any capable team that wants to launch this project should please contact gnu@gnu.org." [RMS}
Ya. I was having my cup of coffee this morning and thinking, "Man, it's been a long time since I've been infected with a solid high quality virus. I should go install W2k."
I keep trying to pick fights, but I can't shake this Excellent karma.
(3) You are unable to read and understand what you read.
lol! Well, that's the first person I've ever heard use the term "unix-y" in a negative way.
;-)
I have to admit, I was on a bit of a tangent when I wrote that response, but I stand by my intention that one who has learned to use Emacs properly would never switch to something else.
Perhaps you should try XEmacs? XEmacs has a toolbar and the more familiar point-and-click interface along with the powerful lisp backend. GNU Emacs does not have such an interface because it needs to work in both GUI and console mode.
Emacs isn't good for writing formatted documents, but as far as programming is concerned (or working with plain text), emacs just is so useful.
Before entirely giving up on Emacs, I suggest checking out XEmacs and reading the Emacs tutorial. Give it a chance and you'll find it so much more useful.
Emacs is not just a better editor, but it has features that no other editor has. So people often come off of the Windows world use to Word and Notepad and never really understand what an editor is capable of.
Either way, atleast your not abandoning Emacs for vi
int func(int a);
func((b += 3, b));
Well, first I'd like to say that I'm not a new convert to linux. Many people assume that when I post on slashdot because I don't agree with their views. But, if it wasn't for disagreeing viewpoints, we'd still be using Motif and deeming IT the greatest.
:P
I've been using linux for well over 4 years...perhaps closer to five or six. I started out with slackware and loved it compared to windows 95. I then found a young distribution online and, after downloading for a week (dial up connections kept dying...a royal pain), I had my first redhat system. This was also the first time I actually had xwindows.
Since then, although I've tried out distributions and the bsd's, my primary OS has always been linux. I've used KDE since before 1.0 but have had my experiences with gnome, fvwm2, enlightenment, etc.
I'm well aware of xEmacs, but I don't care too much for it. Yes, it has a LOT of functionality..that I'm not denying. But, it's simply not the right tool for me. I'm not going to use something because of the long list of features. I'm going to use something that does what *I* need for it to do. After I find the programs that do what I need them to do, then I pick the one that is most pleasing to the eye and implements things in the fashion closest to what I would.
This is going a little off track from the original discussion, but I think it deserves a little time. There are plenty of choices out there for everything. That's what makes linux so great to me. Well, that and the fact that if I spend too much time staring at windows programs, my head starts throbbing and I develop a noticeable twitch
Emacs is great for some...just what they need/want. VI is awesome for others. Still others prefer wordperfect, kwrite, star office, jed, or whatever else. Just like window managers and desktop environments, we can't even agree on ANY program for any purpose. LILO is awesome? I use grub.
Linux users are a stubborn bunch...that's one reason we use linux. We can find all the programs we like and can be stubborn about them. But, instead of just modding someone down as a troll because they have a different opinion...why not realize that different opinions are what makes linux work? If you think about it, differing opinions are why linux even exists.
I disagree highly with RMS. He irritates me to no end. I hope that one day he shuts up. But, like it or not, he's a part of the community. So am I. I admit, I haven't done much FOR the community in the years I've been a part of it. I answer questions, help people install redhat, write letters to congress and whoever else, compiled some KVirc rpms and donated them once upon a time and point out bugs when I find them in whatever programs I use.
I guess what I'm trying to say is I have a choice and my choice is equally valid. I'm not really saying all this to you...your last post was perfectly enjoyable, but I'm saying this to all who read. I think we're all forgetting where we came from and what brought us here. It's different for a lot of people...but damn, choice sure is nice.
I think that it is important that a variety of licensing schemes, and I think that developers' should be free to choose the licenses for their code so long as they are not taking code from other projects.
Freedom is freedom is diversity of opinion. I think that if the BSD or GPL licenses died out, I think that it would be a sad day.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
It "isn't free" because it "cost him" something? Aha, OK, to you "free" means only "doesn't cost anything".
I wonder if you think you're a free man? Do you live in a free country?
Do you have ANY fucking clue?
Christian R. Conrad
mail me at iki.fi ; same user ID as here
Open source wouldn't so much be "breaking into" MS dominated areas, as *expanding* them, helping prop up the monopoly.
Don't do it.
Christian R. Conrad
mail me at iki.fi ; same user ID as here
In practice, this happens so often that when you encounter someone who feels *too* "pleasant", you can't help but wonder if -- heck, you petty much gotta assume that! -- he's compromised his principles, or sold out.
Christian R. Conrad
mail me at iki.fi ; same user ID as here