Slashdot Mirror
RMS Weighs In On BitKeeper
An anonymous reader writes ". . . and boy, is he pissed! The BitKeeper license, he told the Linux kernel mailing list, is 'the whip hand' of proprietary software. His brief but pungent comment is carried by Linux and Main."
I'd love to bitchslap that dirty communist hippie right back to the alley where they found him.
you really ought to shave buddy
the 70's are long gone
He doesn't like it? Is that what he's saying?
And the quote at the bottom of the page: "Every program has (at least) two purposes: the one for which it was written and another for which it wasn't."
The purpose for which BitKeeper was written? Make money by being proprietary.
The other purpose that it wasn't written for? Helping run the development of a system that may just put proprietary software out of business.
I always knew there was a hiddeen meaning to those quotes.
Larry McVoy of BitKeeper said: "2) The software is not open source because the open source business model doesn't have a prayer of supporting the development costs."
To which I ask:
WHAT IS YOUR DEVELOPMENT COSTS?!? And can't you dual-licence?
--
# Canmephians for a better Linux Kernel
$Stalag99{"URL"}="http://stalag99.net";
no, but hes still a fat fuckhead.
"ZeroLogic." That pretty much describes RMS in a nutshell.
I'm not trolling, but I have to level here: we're pretty much dealing with what is a really smart homeless guy. I mean, the guy lived in his office in MIT's LCS cause he refused to pay rent. To each his own, I say. You make a good point, lest it get modded into oblivion by the army of RMS fanboys that often lay tracks here.
If it was up to RMS, we wouldn't have any currency -- we'd be back to the caveman barter days of "I'll give you this here deer skin in exchange for that buffalo." Et cetera. GNU/McDonalds would be giving away free Big Macs, and along with that, we'd all know what in that 'secret sauce...' (Note: please refrain from responding about "RMS' secret sauce...")
"I told ya so! But ya didn't believe me! Why didn't you believe me??!?"
I am sick of you whiners out there thinking that you all derserve everything free and that if someone makes money off of "information" and tries to protect their interests they are asses.
I work in the music/film business. I am making a movie. I own it. I want to sell it to you to watch at home- not to share it or upload it. Is that evil? I am putting my blood and sweat in it, being creative.
Look, it is as simple as this: you don't like the copy protection, patent protection, whatever you have every choice NOT to buy or watch or listen to a product. What the hell, are we supposed to make music/software/movies for free and work at the local diner to play the rent. Hardly.
So grow up.
Oh, and BTW, Linux is still not as good as Windows or Mac. Peroid. My Windows XP system works damn solid, apps install without problems and there is a ton of software. And GIMP- not even close to Photoshop for anyone that makes a living in the graphics biz. Your communistic appraoch to software and information is backwards.
Of course, if you want to make a free product, go ahead. Just respect other peoples rights to decide how they want to do business. Like I said- you don't like what BitKeeper is doing, don't use it. You don't like what Sony Music is doing, don't buy their CDs. But please, this does not mean you can steal it.
Just venting.
Stilleon
Relevant, my ass!
This guy has been spouting more and more bullshit over the last few years. I sincerely hope he shuts up in the very near future.
jesus.
keep up your analog analogies.
you can't be a regular slashdotter.
why don't you leave.
i don't mind people not understanding...express your differing opinion but please...fucking please catch up with everyone else.
anyone who still compares software, bytes and shite to physical objects needs to be removed from slashdot.
WE ARE NOT TALKING CARS, BURGERS, OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT IS A PHYSICAL OBJECT.
who the fuck is modding this guy up? you same clapper heads are the one arguing that free software, free as in beer, is defining a new standard.
you can't compare software to objects that can be traditionally stolen.
so mod this asshole down for bringing up burgers and cars.
how many times am i gonna have to listen to someone's stupid analogy about stealing a car, or borrowing a car, or duplicating a burger.
IT'S NOT THE SAME FUCKING THING.
Of course, he has every right to piss in the wind as much as he likes.
yes, but we're downwind...
EULAs that dictate terms of use of software (as opposed to EULAs that only address distribution), and companies that support those kind of EULAs, and a very dangerous thing.
Why? Isn't that basically what the GPL does when it's applied to library code? The GPL says-- obviously paraphrasing-- that GPL-licensed software cannot be compiled with software that is not GPL-licensed. If you want to use, say, Readline in your program, then your program must be licensed under the GPL. If I wanted my program to remain closed-source, or if I wanted to release it under a more liberal license like the BSD license, I'd be shit-out-of-luck. That severely restricts the way in which I can use Readline. Did you get that? It limits the way I can use, not just distribute, Readline. In that example, and similar ones, the GPL dictates the terms of use of the software in a very specific and overt way.
Let's take another example, a hypothetical one this time. Let's say I wrote some serious mathematical library software, and released it for general use. And let's say that the license I wrote included a clause that said the government of the People's Republic of China may not use my software for the purposes of decrypting communications. Would my license be, as you put it, "a very dangerous thing?" (Ignore for a moment that my example is silly; I'm making a point, not a suggestion.)
I think Stallman's point is all wet.
I write in my journal
Linux is NOT a UN*X variant.
Linux is a UNIX LIKE OPERATING SYSTEM.
Remember?
Linux is GNU, and GNUs NOT UNIX.
Sigh. This is just another nail in his credibility-coffin. Why does it seem like he spends more time picking fights, pushing people to name things the way he wants them to, or to use software the only matches his ideology? For christ's sake (pun intended) he's gotten so damn bad that it's probably just as bad as it was when the first Christians (Or muslims, or jews...) came on the scene ranting about how THEIR god was going to kick everyone ELSE'S god in the ass.
Yes, RMS has contributed far more than I'll ever even DREAM of. Yes, RMS has a super-genius IQ and a -highly- admirable vision of what the future should hold. But goddamit, he needs to start working on some POSITIVE SHIT otherwise he's just going to make the entire Open Source community look like squabbling fools that can't cooperate and will never be able to compete feature-for-feature with commercial software. He wants to prove that Open Source is better, then DO it. Don't just bitch about who gets the credit for the kernel.
Stop picking fights and start being productive in a way that actually inspires everyone, rather than irritates most.
My own pointless vanity vintage computing page
It's time to stop beating a dead horse and switch to the true winner and champion of free source distribution, FreeBSD. It's technically more advanced than linux and the source code is freely available.
Two things: it is not Linux that is popular but GNU/Linux that is, and the kernel developers cannot contrib to project because they used BitKeeper before.
...is that, secretly, Linus is getting a lot of money from that BitKeeper bastards for this bizarre deal
1. Get first post.
2. ???
3. Profit!
It should have been RMS Weighs In On GNU/BitKeeper
One criteria when evaluating the best tool is the license and the users rights. One important citeria should be the users right to see the source and fix bugs and add new features to the software product so that it can work as intended.
This criteria means that many - not all, but nearly all - propriatory software products are inferior.
Just saying it like it are.
Shut up and code!
Make a relevant contribution to something in *this* decade, please!
Point 1: RMS is a fucknut.
Point 2: I've been saying for years that characterizing your mom as "just a filthy slut with a snatch like a rotten pot roast" is grossly unfair. Your mom has also sucked an unbelievable amount of cock during her career, exactly so that men would have a place to ejaculate. She's worked on helping cocksucking by others. She's persuaded people to suck cock. I think she probably has more experience sucking cock than the Linux developers.
I think the argument that only your mom's snatch should be taken into account to the exclusion of her cocksucking skills is completely opposed to the spirit of free cocksucking.