Debian is something different from the others. Yes, they may have packages, but Debian takes that idea to the extreme.
You *NEVER* need to circunvent the package system. The package system never fails.
Everything is packaged by Debian, so every package gets the audting from the community. And this auditing together with the Debian Bug Tracking System tends to create very high quality packages.
apt-get makes upgrading from a whole release to another a 5-minute process.
The strong Debian policy is everywhere. A debian system is very consistent. When several packages relate to the same subject, the maintainers cooperate to create like a "subsystem". So we have an SGML subsystem, perl, emacs, etc.
The open development process (all technical discussions are carried out in public mailing lists) enables users to participate. You can contribute your scripts, suggestions (through the BTS), and most of them will shortly appear on the packaged software.
So, if you are using another distro, give Debian a try.
Look at Sun with the SCSL, they want to get all the benefits of free software without releasing anything to the public. Without giving anything to the "community".
Look at Corel now: They will release free-software, they already said that. But they don't realise that they could take the benefits Sun has saw. The bazaar and all that.
So they think, like any other company, that an open beta can hurt them. And they want to keep the product secret until they think it's ready. I don't think that that violates the spirit of GPL... the GPL could have a clause telling about "time limited restrictions of derived works". And I wouldn't say that that restriction will give less freedom to people, in the medium-long term.
So I don't feel this as a danger, Corel is still an ally. It's just a confused ally.
Debian cannot even distribute KDE because of licensing problems. KDE includes GPL'd code that it's incompatible with the QPL. That's why because the GPL protects those authors from having their code linked to a more restrictive license (QPL).
The above is for QT2, I think that KDE 1 still uses the non-free QT, and that need's no explanation.. =)
Ugh.. bad for gnome. But according to what I've read the KDE solution isn't object oriented either! No inheritance, just messages... The docs say something about implementations in CORBA not being inheritable, only interfaces are. Does someone know what does this really mean? If there's a CORBA class for an editor and I inherit it, wouldn't my own class just need to call some kind of pointer to the super interface? Perhaps someone with a more complete understunding of CORBA could help here.
I'd like to see the information flow in the system migrating to an OO model. It would always be nicer to program something like that, besides being cooler, of course.. =)
I've never used KDE and I've used GNOME very litttle, but I'm interested in the subject of component models. I was an OS/2 user and the WPS had a truly object oriented backend, that worked with SOM (a CORBA ORB!). Then OpenDoc showed up as the next big promise. The feature list was impressive. It was cool, it as CORBA based, it promised todestroy the concept of "application" as we know it (everything was going to be a component).
Enough for an introduction =). What are the directions KDE and GNOME are taking about these things? Are they just targeting a pseudo document oriented desktop as the one included in that OS we all know? I remember having read that Bonobo is based on OLE 2.. is that true? is KOM/OpenParts cool? It would be very interesting to have these things replied, at least for me.... bye! =)
So... if a Slashdot article referred to a second Slashdot article, and this sencond article referred back to the second.... we would have a feedback that would destroy the mankind as we know it.
Uh? So why do they have a license as close as they could imagine (while still releasing code)? Why don't they make Java a true vendor independant standard?
Besides, talk to me in perfect Spanish before daring to talk about my spelling of your language...
His replies are full of lies, of corporate lies. I don't need to say where they are, they are pretty obvious =). But anyway... Lack of Linux support due to nightmare of Linux systems? come on! "pretty close to open source?", come on! Java isn't FreeSoftware for just one reason, they want to make money out of it. That can't be bad, but we must acknowledge that, and we must not believe all those lies about "interoperability"...
Slashdot Mirror
Debian is something different from the others. Yes, they may have packages, but Debian takes that idea to the extreme.
So, if you are using another distro, give Debian a try.
Bye! Did I sell it? =)
Look at Sun with the SCSL, they want to get all the benefits of free software without releasing anything to the public. Without giving anything to the "community".
Look at Corel now: They will release free-software, they already said that. But they don't realise that they could take the benefits Sun has saw. The bazaar and all that.
So they think, like any other company, that an open beta can hurt them. And they want to keep the product secret until they think it's ready. I don't think that that violates the spirit of GPL... the GPL could have a clause telling about "time limited restrictions of derived works". And I wouldn't say that that restriction will give less freedom to people, in the medium-long term.
So I don't feel this as a danger, Corel is still an ally. It's just a confused ally.
You are fighting alone. I've never said that the GPL weren't restrictive... reread my original post....
You can link with any license freer than GPL, but the whole package become GPL'd.
So you can create a product combining XFree and the Linux kernel, and that monster would be GPL'd.
Debian cannot even distribute KDE because of licensing problems. KDE includes GPL'd code that it's incompatible with the QPL. That's why because the GPL protects those authors from having their code linked to a more restrictive license (QPL).
The above is for QT2, I think that KDE 1 still uses the non-free QT, and that need's no explanation.. =)
Ugh.. bad for gnome. But according to what I've read the KDE solution isn't object oriented either! No inheritance, just messages... The docs say something about implementations in CORBA not being inheritable, only interfaces are. Does someone know what does this really mean? If there's a CORBA class for an editor and I inherit it, wouldn't my own class just need to call some kind of pointer to the super interface? Perhaps someone with a more complete understunding of CORBA could help here.
I'd like to see the information flow in the system migrating to an OO model. It would always be nicer to program something like that, besides being cooler, of course.. =)
I've never used KDE and I've used GNOME very litttle, but I'm interested in the subject of component models. I was an OS/2 user and the WPS had a truly object oriented backend, that worked with SOM (a CORBA ORB!). Then OpenDoc showed up as the next big promise. The feature list was impressive. It was cool, it as CORBA based, it promised todestroy the concept of "application" as we know it (everything was going to be a component).
Enough for an introduction =). What are the directions KDE and GNOME are taking about these things? Are they just targeting a pseudo document oriented desktop as the one included in that OS we all know? I remember having read that Bonobo is based on OLE 2.. is that true? is KOM/OpenParts cool? It would be very interesting to have these things replied, at least for me.... bye! =)
So... if a Slashdot article referred to a second Slashdot article, and this sencond article referred back to the second.... we would have a feedback that would destroy the mankind as we know it.
Bye!
It would because MS won't be able to include it in MS Explorer without releasing the whole thing as free software.
Uh? So why do they have a license as close as they could imagine (while still releasing code)? Why don't they make Java a true vendor independant standard?
Besides, talk to me in perfect Spanish before daring to talk about my spelling of your language...
His replies are full of lies, of corporate lies. I don't need to say where they are, they are pretty obvious =). But anyway... Lack of Linux support due to nightmare of Linux systems? come on! "pretty close to open source?", come on!
Java isn't FreeSoftware for just one reason, they want to make money out of it. That can't be bad, but we must acknowledge that, and we must not believe all those lies about "interoperability"...