Slashdot Mirror
Interview with Googles Greg Stein and Chris DiBona
rchapman writes "After the announcement of the new Google Code service at OSCON 2006 in Portland Oregon, we had the distinct pleasure of sitting down and talking with Google's Open Source Program Manager, Chris DiBona and their Lead Open Source Engineer, Greg Stein in a little more detail. Read the full interview here."
A google interview, and it's not event expanded on the frontpage - what is slashdot coming to ? :)
Doolittle :
Bomb no.20 : To explode of course.
We need a new poll, preferably one with a CBN option. :)
To be moron-topic, if given the 8 CowboyNeal options, subjected to Google's AI, which would it choose? Just curious.
Q: Are there any plans to do things such as indexing the projects on SourceForge and adding them into the search database on the Google Code site?
A: Oh yes. We definitely want to do that, as with FreshMeat. That's pretty far off though...
Q: So do you think you'll see many converts from sites like SourceForge and FreshMeat to Google Code?
A: Yeah, there will probably be a couple. Also, we don't offer the kind of services that SourceForge does. We're doing something both less and different.
Q:
They don't seem to be doing anything innovative or even exciting. They're just using the power & name of google to create another tool.
Wow, I never knew they were "googles." What exactly does that mean, anyway, when a person is a google?
Or are "Googles" something like "Fraggles"? Because I've forgotten what Fraggle Rock was all about.
What's that you say? Someone just forgot an apostrophe? Oh. Never mind then. Back to business.-
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
...is on the Apache podcast Feathercast. It's about his Apache activities, not his Google stuff, but hey.
The Army reading list
It definately is interesting to hear these guys talk about Linux, SourceForge and Freshmeat while Google still performs a violation of GNU Generation Public License clause 1. They have choosen to comply with clause 3 with the GPL. However, the GPL does not provide an exception to the requirements of clause 1 just for follow clause 3. The Google applicance is still distributed with GPL covered works and no copy of the GPL. To be more specific:
1) The physical documentation provided with the GSA does not provide a copy of the GPL.
2) The latest version of the GSA documentation available from the support website does not provide a copy of the GPL.
3) The web pages provided from the GSA itself also does not provide a copy of the GPL.
While Google will admit that the GSA does contain GPL covered works and they also claim to be a OSS friendly company, they can not be bothered to follow the very first clause given in one of the most common Linux related licenses.
The bottom line is that Google violates the GPL. Should we really be putting them in a position of trust by accepting "Google Code" from such a company. The fact that Greg Stein and Chris DiBona are willing to answer a couple questions by MadPenguin to spin doctor their company as being "good" does not change that bottom line. Rather, it just makes them two face where they talk about what they want to do for open source out of one mouth and blow off the GPL with the other.
We wrote questions for Greg back in June and he never answered us. What gives?
Like always with Google: An interview with Google does not really provide any news.