"If you thought my post was attempting to assert that the GPL is viral (I have never asserted that and have been involved in 2 GPLed projects - happily) or comprising leetspeak then frankly I think you have comprehension issues"
I'm not specifically talking about your post. I'm talking about all anti-GPL-pro-BSD slander posts on Slashdot in general.
Well, apart from Word compatibility, people also complain about OpenOffice is "nowhere near being a viable alternative to MS Office" (referring to features, learning curve etc) and they almost always get modded up to +5 Insightful.
Well, it that case, it's entirely their fault if they get sued to death. It's like copying a file from a Microsoft product into your own product and then pretending it didn't happen. I'm tired of all the crap about "GPL is viral and will infect your entire product", as if you won't get into more trouble if you copy proprietary code. You copied the code, you violated the license, you face the consequences.
"'More free in that it imposes fewer restrictions' is one simple example."
Fewer restrictions to who? By imposing fewer restrictions like in BSD, you impose more restrictions on people who get the software from a third party. And now it's suddenly less free because those people have less freedom. In other words: whether the BSD license is more free completely depends on one's view. It's useless to slander GPL with "OMG BSD is free and GPL is t3h evil and viral LOlololololol!!!!111"-type of posts, and frankly I'm sick and tired of them.
No I don't. I always put them in seperate folders. I'm not going to mix files where I'm not supposed to, that's asking for problems. And with a versioning control system, you can easily check which files don't belong in your project.
And the GPL frame of mind is: give others the same rights you enjoy. How is this less free than BSD? Would your country be more free if you have the "freedom" to take rights away from your children? Would your country be more free if you have the "freedom" to kill people?
Re:DLL encryption will render this ineffective
on
The Open-Source Detector
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
"Mistakenly using GPL code"? How can anyone use GPL code on accident? You downloaded a tarball, you extracted it, you opened it in a text editor, you copied and pasted the code. And then you tell your boss that you did that "on accident"? Can anyone explain this to me?
It's only "more" free if you define "free" as "having the freedom to remove freedom from those who you distribute the software to". If I write a big open source application, I will license it under the GPL, because I want *everybody* - not only the people who got the software from me, but also the people who got the software from a third party - to benefit from the same freedom. How is this "less" free than allowing third parties to not pass the same freedoms to other?
I don't know how good Word was in reading WordPerfect files, but if you read Slashdot and other sites, you'll see that in almost every single MS Office or OpenOffice stories, people are always complaining that OpenOffice can't read Word documents correctly. On top of that, add VB macros, OLE and that kind of things. I suspect that it was relatively easy to read/write WP documents, but it's much harder to read/write Word documents.
You're wrong: they do make the browser work. With messy and unmaintainable code, you may have 2 new features today, but adding 10 more features tomorrow may be difficult to impossible. With clean maintainable code, you might have 1 more feature today, but tomorrow you can have 5 more and the day after tomorrow 20 more, because you can maintain it without too much trouble. In the long term, clean and maintainable benefit users a lot more.
Are you unable to grasp this, or are you are you just an elitist anti-programmer zealot? My guess is you're the latter. You show disrepect towards programmers only because they are programmers. This will ultimately destroy you. I can already see it now: You: *ring* Company X: "Hello, Company X customer service. How can we help you?" You: "You bunch of fscking morons! I'm gonna shoot all your developers!!!! DEVELOPER = NAZI!!!" Company X: *hangs up*, *revokes your license*, *calls police*
"What are you talking, using more CPU but running faster? What the heck does that mean?
The measure of how much CPU a program uses is how much time the processor spends on it. Hence, all other things being equal, something that runs faster has to use less CPU."
Not necessarily. CPUs these days are much faster than everything else, like your RAM. CPUs spend a lot of time waiting for other hardware. So making your CPU do more work, while making the RAM do less work, can actually increase performance.
And yet OpenGL games on Linux run just as fast as the same OpenGL games do Windows (of course, assuming you have an NVidia card).
Re:Why isn't this already out?
on
Next Generation X11
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Repeat after me: all modern graphics systems use IPC! If you want to get rid of the context switch overhead then you have to write directly to the hardware. There isn't a single operating system which allows you to directly write to the video hardware (with some exceptions, like DGA). Not MS Windows, not MacOS X, not BeOS, not whatever. X as it is right now is not much different from MS Windows or MacOS X as far as communication is concerned: on all platforms, the application has to send a message to an external entity which then draws stuff to screen. You have to do this, otherwise you'll get into synchronization problems with other applications.
So why don't people complain about the IPC overhead in Windows? Because the anti-network transparency hype is overrated.
You are allowed to do that. For example, the Galeon developers explicitly added an exception to their GPL license to allow linking to Mozilla, which was MPL at the time. The MySQL developers added an exception to the GPL license to allow the non-GPL'ed PHP to link to the GPL'ed MySQL libraries.
That's only one side of the story. Unfortunately we can't comment on joey's blog. Basically joey concludes that autopackage sucks because he found out that autopackages cannot be easily converted to RPMs or DEBs with Alien. But that is by design: autopackage's design is fundamentally different from RPMs and DEBs. Trying to convert it to other packaging formats is asking for trouble and cannot be done reliably. You may want to read http://www.licquia.org/archives/2005/03/27/autopac kage-considered-harmful/ for responses from Mike, the project leader.
Slashdot Mirror
"If you thought my post was attempting to assert that the GPL is viral (I have never asserted that and have been involved in 2 GPLed projects - happily) or comprising leetspeak then frankly I think you have comprehension issues"
I'm not specifically talking about your post. I'm talking about all anti-GPL-pro-BSD slander posts on Slashdot in general.
If you got the software from a third party then you're *still* a licenser.
Well, apart from Word compatibility, people also complain about OpenOffice is "nowhere near being a viable alternative to MS Office" (referring to features, learning curve etc) and they almost always get modded up to +5 Insightful.
Well, it that case, it's entirely their fault if they get sued to death. It's like copying a file from a Microsoft product into your own product and then pretending it didn't happen. I'm tired of all the crap about "GPL is viral and will infect your entire product", as if you won't get into more trouble if you copy proprietary code. You copied the code, you violated the license, you face the consequences.
Well, if I follow your logic:
Country with law: don't kill people.
Country without law: kill or don't kill people.
Conclusion: a country without law is more free than a country with law.
Rediculous comparison? Maybe. But it's the same logic as yours.
"'More free in that it imposes fewer restrictions' is one simple example."
Fewer restrictions to who? By imposing fewer restrictions like in BSD, you impose more restrictions on people who get the software from a third party. And now it's suddenly less free because those people have less freedom.
In other words: whether the BSD license is more free completely depends on one's view. It's useless to slander GPL with "OMG BSD is free and GPL is t3h evil and viral LOlololololol!!!!111"-type of posts, and frankly I'm sick and tired of them.
I don't know, I don't live in the USA and I don't know what the 13th Amendment is.
It is relevant. Freedom is all about ethics. Freedom is not true freedom if it is bad.
No I don't. I always put them in seperate folders. I'm not going to mix files where I'm not supposed to, that's asking for problems. And with a versioning control system, you can easily check which files don't belong in your project.
And the GPL frame of mind is: give others the same rights you enjoy. How is this less free than BSD? Would your country be more free if you have the "freedom" to take rights away from your children? Would your country be more free if you have the "freedom" to kill people?
"Mistakenly using GPL code"? How can anyone use GPL code on accident? You downloaded a tarball, you extracted it, you opened it in a text editor, you copied and pasted the code. And then you tell your boss that you did that "on accident"?
Can anyone explain this to me?
It's only "more" free if you define "free" as "having the freedom to remove freedom from those who you distribute the software to".
If I write a big open source application, I will license it under the GPL, because I want *everybody* - not only the people who got the software from me, but also the people who got the software from a third party - to benefit from the same freedom. How is this "less" free than allowing third parties to not pass the same freedoms to other?
Your freedom ends where others' begin.
I don't know how good Word was in reading WordPerfect files, but if you read Slashdot and other sites, you'll see that in almost every single MS Office or OpenOffice stories, people are always complaining that OpenOffice can't read Word documents correctly. On top of that, add VB macros, OLE and that kind of things.
I suspect that it was relatively easy to read/write WP documents, but it's much harder to read/write Word documents.
My goal is to make pretty code *and* usable applications. They're not mutually exclusive you know. In the long term, they're even interrelated.
You're wrong: they do make the browser work. With messy and unmaintainable code, you may have 2 new features today, but adding 10 more features tomorrow may be difficult to impossible. With clean maintainable code, you might have 1 more feature today, but tomorrow you can have 5 more and the day after tomorrow 20 more, because you can maintain it without too much trouble. In the long term, clean and maintainable benefit users a lot more.
Are you unable to grasp this, or are you are you just an elitist anti-programmer zealot? My guess is you're the latter. You show disrepect towards programmers only because they are programmers. This will ultimately destroy you. I can already see it now:
You: *ring*
Company X: "Hello, Company X customer service. How can we help you?"
You: "You bunch of fscking morons! I'm gonna shoot all your developers!!!! DEVELOPER = NAZI!!!"
Company X: *hangs up*, *revokes your license*, *calls police*
"What are you talking, using more CPU but running faster? What the heck does that mean?
The measure of how much CPU a program uses is how much time the processor spends on it. Hence, all other things being equal, something that runs faster has to use less CPU."
Not necessarily. CPUs these days are much faster than everything else, like your RAM. CPUs spend a lot of time waiting for other hardware. So making your CPU do more work, while making the RAM do less work, can actually increase performance.
And yet OpenGL games on Linux run just as fast as the same OpenGL games do Windows (of course, assuming you have an NVidia card).
Repeat after me: all modern graphics systems use IPC! If you want to get rid of the context switch overhead then you have to write directly to the hardware. There isn't a single operating system which allows you to directly write to the video hardware (with some exceptions, like DGA). Not MS Windows, not MacOS X, not BeOS, not whatever. X as it is right now is not much different from MS Windows or MacOS X as far as communication is concerned: on all platforms, the application has to send a message to an external entity which then draws stuff to screen. You have to do this, otherwise you'll get into synchronization problems with other applications.
So why don't people complain about the IPC overhead in Windows? Because the anti-network transparency hype is overrated.
You are allowed to do that. For example, the Galeon developers explicitly added an exception to their GPL license to allow linking to Mozilla, which was MPL at the time. The MySQL developers added an exception to the GPL license to allow the non-GPL'ed PHP to link to the GPL'ed MySQL libraries.
So? The original poster claimed that RedHat is not 100% GPL. Trademarks have got nothing to do with the license.
Nope, you're wrong on even that one. The hat icon is redhat-main-menu.png, and belongs to the redhat-artwork RPM.
$ rpm -qi redhat-artwork-0.88-1 | grep -i license
License: GPL
- Anaconda installer - open source
- Kickstart - open source
- GUI configuration tools - open source
So which parts are not open source?
You may be interested in relaytool. See http://autopackage.org/ for info.
Joey's blog is only one side of the story. See my reply at http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=144 756&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&tid=185&mode=thread &pid=12122773#12125768
That's only one side of the story. Unfortunately we can't comment on joey's blog. Basically joey concludes that autopackage sucks because he found out that autopackages cannot be easily converted to RPMs or DEBs with Alien. But that is by design: autopackage's design is fundamentally different from RPMs and DEBs. Trying to convert it to other packaging formats is asking for trouble and cannot be done reliably. You may want to read http://www.licquia.org/archives/2005/03/27/autopac kage-considered-harmful/ for responses from Mike, the project leader.