Slashdot Mirror
GNOME Developer Suggests Split From GNU Project
blozza2070 writes "In a recent posting from Philip Van Hoof, he suggests that GNOME split off from the GNU Project and has proposed a vote. He was informed he will need 10% of members to agree for a vote to be put forth. At the same time, David Schlesinger (on the GNOME Advisory Board) has agreed on a vote. Stormy Peters said she doesn't agree with this, but then gave everyone instructions on how to proceed with a vote. She mentioned that roughly 20 members are needed to agree."
The mailing list server is timing out as of this writing, but iTWire has the Cliff's notes.
it's not bullshit, these links prove it with complete documentation, mainly from Lefty's own emails and blogs. documentation the partisan mdz blog refused to print.
the truth is winning, despite your attempts to drown it in lies.
RMS called Schlesinger a "troll like enemy of free software" for a very good reason, RMS doesn't use this kind of language often.
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=4902686590059408050&postID=7665635887324397605
and here:
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=4902686590059408050&postID=7149350615784434698
Agreed. Gnome doesn't exactly NEED Stallman - if they ever did.
Stallman is a queer one - he has a number of good points, but he's batshit fucking crazy sometimes. Someone said he should for reality. Sounds like a good idea. He's be much happier in a universe where proprietary didn't exist, and many of us would be happier without him.
As for proprietary crap - I use proprietary video drivers almost exclusively. I don't exactly LIKE the fact that this is the only way to get max performance from my video card - but at some point, you have to compromise with reality.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Meh...
I never really fully understood this line of attack on C#/.NET/Mono. Yeah, if MS wakes up one day and starts suing distros for using patented CLI stuff (or whatever the patents are on), most of the world really doesn't care. What the US and Japan recognize software patents? That's it, right?
I'm from the US and I'm not worried. There are two different ways to combat this:
1) Move servers out of the affected countries.
2) Don't distribute binaries.
Now, #2 might not work. I've always thought that you can't infringe on a patent simply by implementing a patented algorithm because all the patents state that the patent includes that the algorithm be running on a computer. That's how they get around the "patenting math" stuff -- you can't patent an algorithm, but you can patent an algorithm running on a computer. So as long as you don't distribute a binary, you're just describing a patent (which the text of patents are in the public domain).
Red Hat may very well be screwed, but most of the rest wouldn't be. Especially not Debian.
In any case, Microsoft won't come after end-users for patent infringement. It simply won't happen.
Wow, way to miss the point. If they ever add a "missing the point" event to the Olympics, you should compete-- oh but maybe you're not eligible because you're a pro and not amateur. Too bad.
Comment of the year
Miguel interviewed at Microsoft but they didn't hire him.
--
[citation needed]
Never has a sig been more appropriate. I no longer believe that he didn't get the job. Frankly, the simplest explanation for everything he's said and done since then is that he's on their payroll, or at least is a paid consultant.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
There've even been cases of hysterical GNU "developers" thinking they need to re-license BSD-licensed software under the GPL, but it just doesn't work that way.
Actually it's been more the other way around: a developer includes BSD code into his GPL-licensed project, makes improvements (knowing that his GPLed improvements are safe from non-FOSS software, and yes it does just work that way). Original BSD developer throws a public hissy fit because he can't use the new and improved code in his project. Funny how he didn't care when it was happening behind closed doors, but having the new code right under his nose was just too much.
Moral of the story, if you don't want people doing whatever with your code, don't choose a permissive license!
No offense, but you sound like an idiot. I would dismiss anything you said, too.