Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 16:38:34 -0700 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, jkh@zippy.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: O'Reilly article: Whence the Source: Untangling the Open Source/Free Software Debate Message-ID: <4.1.19990312162726.03ff1c40@localhost> In-Reply-To: <199903122243.PAA07170@usr08.primenet.com> References: <24351.921273950@zippy.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 10:43 PM 3/12/99 +0000, Terry Lambert wrote: >Brett is adversarial to GPL supporters, yes. But he is not adversarial >about the use of Linux or Microsoft products, at least from the writing >I have seen. This is true. I believe that the fact that Linux is licensed under the GPL is an unfortunate historical accident about which even Linus may now be having second thoughts. His comments at LinuxWorld suggested this. >Brett's opinions on the GPL should really be irrelevent to you, as a >FreeBSD advocate, no matter how he voices them. If it really bothers >you, then treat it as if Brett has Tourette's syndrome when it comes >to matters GPL. Really, Terry, it's not as if I spontaneously shout curses or anything. I've always been careful to voice thoughtful arguments about the subject. The trouble seems to be that the hair-trigger GPL zealots immediately shout curses whenever they hear ANYTHING unflattering about the Holy Writ. ;-) >The problem Brett is dealing with when he points out the consequential >weaknesses of the GPL is that the GPL has a lot of uneducated zealots >that you have to deal with. Absolutely. Even some people like Jamie Love, of Ralph Nader's organization, have an irrational attachment to the GPL. Even though it is arguably anti-consumer. I must admit that I'm puzzled by this behavior. >My personal deflection is to point them to a better GPL than the GPL, >the Cygnus eCOS license (BTW, the Ricoh Open Source license is a >near verbatim copy of that license). I also point them to a document >that paints Stallman in a very bad light: the GNU manifesto. If God >can do no wrong, then you have to kill your son when God tells you >to do so as an act of faith -- take the bitter with the sweet. But >if it's too bitter, your gag reflex triggers (didn't that Theodore >Kazinsky guy have a manifesto, too?). Yes, he did. And threatened to do more bombing if it wasn't published in newspapers, as I recall. >The problem is that anything said against the GPL is taken as an >"our license is better" argument, even if that's not the context in >which the issue was raised. This is intentional social engineering >by RMS, and in fact has been as ingrained into the GPL fanatics as >a kata ingrains defenses or counter attacks into follow-throughs of >reflex actions. Mention the GPL, and it's "Shields up, Mr. Sulu!" >for most of that crowd. > >If Brett has a folley in this regard, it's buying into the diversion >of the radical Stallmanites into the "You are saying yours is better!" >by saying "Well, it is!", instead of "You've misunderstood me.". Well, I think that even Jordan has misunderstood me here, so I guess misunderstandings are common when it comes to these issues. What can we do about this? >John Dyson is moving into the area of good non-GPL advocacy; I wish >he'd pull the rug out from under them while pointing at the flying >saucers a little more often, though. Perhaps John Dyson could be appointed the spokesperson on licensing matters, if he's willing. (He's doing it already.) >In any case, I believe that FreeBSD needs over-zealous people promoting >it, and the more the better. Agreed. >FreeBSD needs someone insane enough to start a project to get the >FreeBSD API ported to Linux and Solaris and UnixWare and Windows, >to take that, and leverage the fact to get companies to commit to >the single ABI (maybe even change the FreeBSD ABI to match one of >the commercial UNIX implementations, instead); and that's just one >example where only a fanatic will do. Trouble is, Linux is the dominant ABI these days! Adapting FreeBSD to that is basically abdicating control of the direction of the product. >It is not enough for FreeBSD to be an also-ran, and anyone who is >willing to fanatically carry that banner is a soldier in your army. Agreed. But first we need to convince Jordan that I'm not a TOTAL raving loony. ;-) --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.1.19990312162726.03ff1c40>