Slashdot Mirror
2012 Free Software Award Winners Announced
jrepin writes "Free Software Foundation president Richard M. Stallman announced the winners of the FSF's annual Free Software Awards at a ceremony held during the LibrePlanet 2013 conference. The Award for the Advancement of Free Software is given annually to an individual who has made a great contribution to the progress and development of free software, through activities that accord with the spirit of free software. This year, it was given to Dr. Fernando Perez, the creator of IPython, a rich architecture for interactive computing. The Award for Projects of Social Benefit is presented to the project or team responsible for applying free software, or the ideas of the free software movement, in a project that intentionally and significantly benefits society in other aspects of life. This award stresses the use of free software in the service of humanity. This year, the award went to OpenMRS, a free software medical record system for developing countries."
If those licenses don't make the software really free they can't win the price, because.... it's the price for FREE software.. It's not that hard.
2012: Dr. Fernando Perez, (IPython)
2011: Matz (ruby)
2001: Guido van Rossum (python)
1998: Larry Wall (perl)
Rasmus Lerdorf (php) must feel a little left out.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
As someone who writes software for living, I admire these people.
Many developers share that view. Many others do not. Is this really the time and place?
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
That's a silly thing to say considering it's the developer himself who is free to determine the license he wishes to release his work under. A lot of developers want to release their work under the GPL, and a lot don't. But all are free to license their work as they see fit.
GPL doesnt "make the software really free" unless you subscribe to a particular definition of freedom which excludes developer freedom.
Much like liberty doesn't make people really free unless you subscribe to a particular definition of freedom which excludes jailor freedom.
Any definition of freedom that doesn't let me put other people into cages just isn't really freedom.
That's not free software according to the FSF because it is BSD licensed rather than GPL.
That's not true. The BSD license is definitely present in the FSF's list of free software licenses.
The Ipython notebook, although not an original idea (I think they were inspired by the Sage notebook), is just fantastic. I do a fair amount of exploratory analysis and it's so much better doing it in a notebook than in a standalone script - I get to see all the plots, and document as I go along. Most importantly, it lets me experiment with commands as one would in a regular interpreter shell, but without the clutter of all my faulty commands.
If anyone wants to help open source, I would strongly recommend helping improve ipython, scipy or matplotlib. Fernando Perez pointed out in a recent conference that while on the surface these all seem like excellent, well polished projects, if one looks at the committers, they'll find most commits are being done by 2-3 people (for each project). It's not healthy for it to depend on so few people. As a case in point, the main committer for matlplotlib passed away recently and everyone's nervous about its future.
Beetle B.
GPL doesnt "make the software really free" unless you subscribe to a particular definition of freedom which excludes developer freedom.
Shame you got modded Troll, because you're exactly right. Software Freedom and Developer Freedom aren't the same thing, nor are they obligatorily linked. GPL is about Software Freedom and BSD is about Developer Freedom. There's no better way to explain this than to compare the two licenses.
Of course the WTFPL folks would argue that neither are either.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)