From owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 20 07:56:56 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED30716A406 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:56:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Received: from pittgoth.com (pittgoth.com [205.134.163.206]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9921A13C448 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:56:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (net-ix.gw.ai.net [205.134.160.6]) (authenticated bits=0) by pittgoth.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l3K7vIPG084937 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 20 Apr 2007 03:57:18 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 03:56:44 -0400 From: Tom Rhodes To: Radu-Cristian FOTESCU Message-Id: <20070420035644.3c942b3b.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <833273.68226.qm@web57708.mail.re3.yahoo.com> References: <20070419223144.7c41d668.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> <833273.68226.qm@web57708.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Organization: The FreeBSD Project X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.6 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd7.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: The sorry state of open source today X-BeenThere: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD Evangelism List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:56:57 -0000 On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 03:19:25 -0400 (EDT) Radu-Cristian FOTESCU wrote: > --- Tom Rhodes wrote: > > > > have expected a mix of positive and negative reactions. > > Absolutely. But I have never said a word on the "control" -- what's this > obsession on the control?! Are you so unhappy about NetBSD being _controlled_ > by TNF, that you really, really must to assert your independence?! What was it that you said then? I actually cannot remember. But I am probably the last person who ever needs to assert their independence. :) > > It was only about the legal issues. While a developer or the abstract entity > that is the Project may not be liable (or rather they are liable, but can't > be reliably sued if the developers are outside the U.S.), I am afraid the > Foundation is still an American subject, and all the possible attacks on the > Project will be directed to the Foundation, from the legal standpoint. I'm not a lawyer and won't discuss the legal points of who can be sued for what reason etc. > > You can't imagine how many injurious comments from Linux fanboys I had to > delete, for just using about *BSD some words I can't reproduce here. Trust me, I've been to a multi-state Linux event. My imagination is pretty good from that stand point. Otherwise, parsing your last sentence here is a bit difficult. > > This is sad. I feel like I was seen as an "enemy", or as someone who said > that the Project is "captive and controlled". I am not your enemy, I never > was, and -- while I agree I could not afford to allocate more space for *BSD, > hence what I wrote about FreeBSD is highly condensed -- I know what I have > wrote not. It's better than being "an hero" to be honest. Anyway, just smile, nod, move on. You wrote an article. The title alone is enough to get oss advocates up in arms, you were a public figure for a week, yay, just let it go. I know it hurts, it sucks, but not everyone was negative about it. Next time write about dogs if you don't want all the attention. ;) -- Tom Rhodes