With both standards published, it is possible then for developers to include support for each. That only works for complete standards, which would rule out OOXML. It has tags such as "do the spacing like Word 95". How, exactly, is a developer outside of Microsoft going to support that? And how is it "open" when you reference closed binary-only software in your spec? The OOXML people could fix this, but up to now they have resisted cleaning up their spec in any major way, and continue to push it even though it has major flaws.
What does that even mean? Clearly, you need to re-read the GPL. The GPLv2 is *already* "dual licensed" (I put the term in quotes because it's nonsensical to talk about it as such) as GPLv3 by virtue of its "any future version" clause. Ahem, I think you need to reread the license. First, there are quite a few GPLv2-only projects out there, such as the Linux kernel. There is no requirement to include the "later version" statement in programs, as it is not a part of the actual license. The license statement/boilerplate says which license you use, but it is not the actual license (except in the case of short licenses like MIT, where the entire license is sometimes used as the boilerplate). This has been discussed in detail before on LKML and Debian-Legal, so I'm surprised you haven't heard of this. My particular projects are GPLv2-only at the moment, because I do not believe in supporting licenses which don't exist -- now that really is nonsense.
Furthermore, GCC requires assignment of copyright to the FSF, so the FSF has full say over what the license is. Nothing additional is required of contributors. I'm well aware of this. If you can find something in my post which is inconsistent with this, let me know. I was just giving my opinion on what I think most projects should do. Since all FSF projects require copyright assignment, they can do what they want, and meanwhile I can give my opinion.
I think you might want to consult with a lawyer about your own project's licenses, as well. I have talked with lawyers before on the licensing, although the GPL3 did not exist then so that wasn't the issue. As I stated before, the 2-vs-3 thing has been covered in quite a bit of depth elsewhere, and I'm pretty happy with what others have determined in their analyses. There are people out there using licenses they have never even read, so I think they might be more in need of a lawyer than I am. I don't make a living off my projects anyway, so I am not too worried about worst-case legal consequences causing me much harm.
It seems to me what you really want is to continue accepting contributions as GPLv2, but I can't actually make any sense out of what you are saying above. Modulo your different interpretation of the GPL license itself versus the license statement for a block of code, we seem to agree completely. I require contributions to be submitted as "GPL 2 or at your option any later version". Thus far I've released my compilation as GPLv2 only, for much the same reasons that the Linux kernel is released that way. Future versions will likely be GPLv2+GPLv3 (exercising my "or later" option to others' contributions).
IMHO, dual licensed (GPL 2 + GPL 3) is the way to go for a time, while things shake out in the world of free software. Of course GCC, as a FSF project wants to lead the way to a GPL 3 future. However, I think projects would be wise to require contributions as >=GPL2, and release their software as either >=GPL2 or dual-licensed. The latter is what I'm doing to do in the next release of my own work; I don't really want to take sides, and will let competition sort out which license becomes popular. I won't accept outside contributions that are GPL3 only, which is the only thing that might annoy some developers.
That's the most insightful attempt to solve the H1B problem I've ever heard. The government still gets to regulate somewhat through the overall quota, companies that really want people (like they say they do) can pay up to get them, and the playing field is leveled somewhat by the H1B fees. And it generates revenue for the government. Google or some other company should start pushing this idea to the government:)
No kidding, "conspiracy and mail fraud" is way over the top. There's probably a loophole in the ToS anyway to cover this.
What you will probably see is angry users and complaints; That's the right way to solve this sort of thing. I wish the populate would try complaints or a boycott instead of jumping immediately to calls of corruption and a class action lawsuit.
Brilliant, because Operating Systems are almost as important to Businesses as ice-cream, i don't think anyone would deny that. If you can't attack the argument, make fun of the metaphor.
There is a downside to Linux having so dists, whether you want their to be or not. Does it help? Probably not. Does it hurt? Probably not that much either. Is there a damn thing anyone can do about it, since this is free software? No. I never claimed there was no downside whatsoever, just that it isn't a big deal like some make it out to be. It really is more difficult when confronted with 31 flavors of ice cream than 4, but people manage.
When a newcomer comes onto the scene, willing to give it a go, which one do they pick? I really didn't expect this to be over people's heads: For ice cream, Vanilla or chocolate. For Linux, right now probably Ubuntu or one of the other 3 or 4 most popular distributions. There are Live CDs and even online guides to help a new user choose.
Or when you ask a few people at your office for some recommendations and they start arguing about which is best. What happens when you ask them what brand of car you should buy? Same thing. Does it stop people from buying cars? Not really. Oh wait, I'm sorry, "cars are not as important to businesses as operating systems." Maybe you should look up stats and guides online, or go out and test-drive some cars (Live CD), rather than asking your coworkers.
Ignoring these facts is just plain stupid. What facts? All I see is an unsubstantiated claim, a question, an anecdote from work, and generally poor grammar. If you want to convince me you'll have to try harder.
You have a good selection in front of you and you don't know what to pick, so you ask your friend to pick for you. He could pick vanilla...it's basic, most likely you'll like it but it's very plain so it might not be "good enough" to make you switch over forever. I'd say the friend is trying too hard, and should just recommend vanilla. If you want other flavors, you'll find out about them later. This is the same reason I wouldn't tell a new user to try Gentoo or Debian, and would instead steer them toward Ubuntu or something similar. This is despite the fact that I personally would prefer the former options.
You can draw your own conclusions, but sometimes too much to choose from is a bad thing. Choice is a strength and a weakness. Too much choice can be bad, but when you never even hear about 95% of the choices, it gets quite a bit easier. If someone wants to complain that the 5 or so major distributions is too many, that is an argument I might listen to. However if someone starts with the 300 number, I already know they aren't looking at the "problem" in an honest way.
Personally, I think the way that this large number of choices hurts Linux the most is by spreading the number of people who maintain and develop too thin. Would it be better to have 1 user each working on 350 separate distros or maybe have 70 users each working on 5 distros? I'd think the latter would be able to get more work done faster. The number of developers or users is not at all uniformly distributed. Most of those 300 distributions have a few developers/maintainers at most (or none), because it was someone's random pet project. The top few distributions have most of the developers/maintainers. So, the reality is a lot closer to your second example of 5 distributions than the uniform spreading over all distros.
Now you can get asphalt and cactus flavor, rust and candle wax flavor, Nair and pumpkin flavor, and jerky toothpaste flavor! That's Linux. And none of that prevents me from getting a scoop of vanilla, now does it? By the way pumpkin and cactus are real ice cream flavors I have seen.
But without the vanilla flavored baseline... who's to say what ice cream is anyhow? Without LSB, who's to say what Linux is? Without Posix, who's to say what Unix is?
Wow, I didn't know they did that. That's pretty sad, and yet another reason I'm happy using a distro in the Debian family tree. If they had just "workstation" and "server" it wouldn't be too bad, but once you start having server variants you're going to lose people.
There are also too many flavors of ice cream. I mean, with the hundreds of flavors around, how can businesses buying ice cream for their employees ever narrow it to just a few flavors that their employees will likely approve of? The choice is just too difficult.
Across those 300 distros there are probably less than a dozen configuration/install systems, and less than half a dozen packaging systems. While the RedHat/Debian packaging systems may be a forks, their derivatives almost always use the parent's system. In a lot of cases there is even some package compatibility between branched distros.
ppl get annoyed at microsoft for having a few "distros".. linux has 300+ and ppl expect nobody to complain? only a linux user would think like that.. Microsoft tries to position itself as the unified, easy choice, and then goes and makes have a dozen variants of Vista. Linux distros are largely limited to different companies, with most having only two (home/free and business/supported). If RedHat came out with six variants tomorrow, I'd call them dumb too.
way back nixers used to bash windows for their DLL issues.. these days dependencies and libraries on nix is a far bigger problem than DLL ever was.. funny that.. walking right into their own trap.. Please cite some examples if you want me to believe you. Come back when you can upgrade *all* your applications and dependencies with a single unified installer/updater. Dependencies are not a problem unless I compile something myself, which incidentally is no different from Windows, except that I can download and install everything through a single interface.
linux is great for being opensource.. but ppl who says it ISNT a mess are just plain retarded..but as usual ppl who are linuxfanboys would refuse to realize this regardless of how big the problem was cos in their eyes linux is "teh god" who cannot do wrong.. this is the primary reason I cant stand linux.. the fucking anal attitude of so many in the community.... Your problem is pretty much summed up in the above paragraph. If you join a community, do so quietly, sit back and learn. Do that for a while BEFORE opening your mouth. Don't come in and tell them how they need to change and everything that is "wrong". In the real world, when you walk into someone's house for the first time, do you start by insulting them? Would you then say that they have an anal attitude for kicking you out? When you get a new job, do you tell your boss that "this isn't the way I used to do things at my old job, you must be doing it wrong", and "your business is a mess!", and then get angry that he doesn't want you to come back? Linux communities may be "tricky", but only if you treat them differently from communities/houses/jobs/clubs in the real world. Use tact and you'll do fine anywhere.
they just get a black box that parses their private data and makes it searchable. Actually, they are anything but black... try electric blue and canary yellow. On second thought, black might be nice...
As opposed to an LCD which truly is at a given level, there is no fade out. Wrong. Go to Tom's hardware and look at any of their LCD reviews. The response curve is not square, nor is it likely to be anywhere near the quoted speed, which is usually describing the best case rather than the worst case. You're also neglecting the common "overdrive" method used to get sub "16ms" response times, which means the LCD takes a long time to actually converge on a level; Contrary to your claim, for video it really is almost never is at the right level, rather it wobbles around it and looks grainy. So, CRTs are still better at response time (in particular rise time) and flatness of a shade, but suck for all the other reasons that CRTs do (size, weight, flicker, etc). It's a trade-off, please don't try to pretend it isn't.
If you want a good waveform, you'll need an OLED. Those can respond in a few ms from/to any brightness level (just like an LED). Once those take off in popularity, they will probably rule the roost for gaming and video, if not everything.
Nope, Kim Stanley Robinson. A name that is both effeminate and ultra-manly at the same time. Anyway, Ann would give you an angry glare, while Sax would just tilt his head and consider you unimportant.
Actually you're going well beyond my knowledge of GPS. You make an excellent point about using base stations to make these corrections; You're referring to WAAS, right? I guess there really isn't much of a difference between broadcasting corrections for individual satellites versus NAVSTAR-Galileo skew, assuming the protocol can support adding that information.
The more systems the merrier, if they can be made compatible. That way GPS devices can become ever more accurate while many nations share the cost. Now if only my phone didn't charge extra to use its onboard GPS...
Slashdot Mirror
IMHO, dual licensed (GPL 2 + GPL 3) is the way to go for a time, while things shake out in the world of free software. Of course GCC, as a FSF project wants to lead the way to a GPL 3 future. However, I think projects would be wise to require contributions as >=GPL2, and release their software as either >=GPL2 or dual-licensed. The latter is what I'm doing to do in the next release of my own work; I don't really want to take sides, and will let competition sort out which license becomes popular. I won't accept outside contributions that are GPL3 only, which is the only thing that might annoy some developers.
Don't like your roommate? Sneak onto his PC and download some movies. Imagine the surprise when he loses his net connection permanently.
That's the most insightful attempt to solve the H1B problem I've ever heard. The government still gets to regulate somewhat through the overall quota, companies that really want people (like they say they do) can pay up to get them, and the playing field is leveled somewhat by the H1B fees. And it generates revenue for the government. Google or some other company should start pushing this idea to the government :)
...and should be replaced with struts made of carbon nanotubes.
(well at least if you grew up in SOVIET RUSSIA)
No kidding, "conspiracy and mail fraud" is way over the top. There's probably a loophole in the ToS anyway to cover this.
What you will probably see is angry users and complaints; That's the right way to solve this sort of thing. I wish the populate would try complaints or a boycott instead of jumping immediately to calls of corruption and a class action lawsuit.
A strange game. The only winning move then is not to play.
Created/endorsed by chess genius and raving lunatic Bobby Fischer: "I don't play the old chess. But obviously if I did, I would be the best."
That's what live CDs are for. Now you really can try a different Linux in the same time it takes to go get some ice cream.
Wow, I didn't know they did that. That's pretty sad, and yet another reason I'm happy using a distro in the Debian family tree. If they had just "workstation" and "server" it wouldn't be too bad, but once you start having server variants you're going to lose people.
There are also too many flavors of ice cream. I mean, with the hundreds of flavors around, how can businesses buying ice cream for their employees ever narrow it to just a few flavors that their employees will likely approve of? The choice is just too difficult.
Across those 300 distros there are probably less than a dozen configuration/install systems, and less than half a dozen packaging systems. While the RedHat/Debian packaging systems may be a forks, their derivatives almost always use the parent's system. In a lot of cases there is even some package compatibility between branched distros.
Especially when it costs $400.
It's funny you should suggest the mp3 player which historically has had the worst SNR.
How many libraries of congress can you scan in a minute?
Not many, apparently.
If you want a good waveform, you'll need an OLED. Those can respond in a few ms from/to any brightness level (just like an LED). Once those take off in popularity, they will probably rule the roost for gaming and video, if not everything.
Nope, Kim Stanley Robinson. A name that is both effeminate and ultra-manly at the same time. Anyway, Ann would give you an angry glare, while Sax would just tilt his head and consider you unimportant.
Actually you're going well beyond my knowledge of GPS. You make an excellent point about using base stations to make these corrections; You're referring to WAAS, right? I guess there really isn't much of a difference between broadcasting corrections for individual satellites versus NAVSTAR-Galileo skew, assuming the protocol can support adding that information.
The more systems the merrier, if they can be made compatible. That way GPS devices can become ever more accurate while many nations share the cost. Now if only my phone didn't charge extra to use its onboard GPS...