The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

The "free software community" does not include Linus

The big problem with this definition is that it leaves out I guess more
than 80% of the linux people. Linus himself would not qualify for being a
member of this community since I am certain he does not agree to your
very dogmatic view of free-software. I pretty much identify with the
statement of Linus gives below. Bruce, really I think we should get this
dogmatic I-need-to-force-the-GPL-on-all-people streak out of the Debian.

I dont think Debian can compete in the long run with other distribution if
Debian continues to antagonize other projects. I would rather see Debian
contribute in a positive way (that does not mean abandon the free software
aim for the core distribution). More tolerance for others and cooperation 
and less anti-this and anti-that would do much for the success of the
project as a whole.

http://www.twics.com/~tlug/linus.html:

HY: You have become one of the champions of free software. However, unlike
       Richard Stallman, we don't see you commenting much on what free
       software should be and what it means to all of us. Are you
       interested in these "promote free software" aspects at all, or
       are you more interested in the software itself? 

Linus: I'm generally a very pragmatic person: that which works,
       works. When it comes to software, I _much_ prefer free software,
       because I have very seldom seen a program that
       has worked well enough for my needs, and having sources available
       can be a life-saver. 

       So in that sense I am an avid promoter of free software, and GPL'd
       stuff in particular (because once it's GPL'd I _know_ it's going to
       stay free, so I don't have to worry about future releases). 

       However, that doesn't mean that I'm opposed to commercial software.
       Commercial software development has some advantages too - the
       money-making aspects introduces some new incentives that aren't
       there for most free software. And those incentives often
       make for a more polished product. 

       For example, I've been very happy indeed with the commercial Linux
       CD-ROM vendors linux Red Hat. What commercialism has brought into
       Linux has been the incentive to make  a good distribution that is
       easy to use and that has all the packaging issues worked out -
       essentially everything is easily available. 

On Fri, 31 Oct 1997, Bruce Perens wrote:

> > So the "free software community" is the community that adheres to the
> > contract? This is self-referential and really does not clarify the
> > situation.
> 
> A Talmudic argument? Let's see if I can work this out. (If you don't like
> talmudic arguments, tune out here.)
> 
> 1. Debian's definition of the set of Free Software is all software which
>    conforms to the conditions of the DFSG.
> 
> 2. The Free Software Community as that set of entities who produce Free
>    Software.
> 
> 3. Thus, the DFSG implicitly defines the Free Software Community for
>    Debian.
> 
> 4. In Debian's Social Contract, we pledge that we are, and will remain,
>    good members of the Free Software Community.
> 
> 5. Thus, Debian's Social Contract, taken together with the DFSG, is the
>    work of a member of the Free Software Community defining that community.
> 
> Now, I understand that you don't like that the above is self-referential,
> however I don't think it's unreasonable for a community to define itself.
> Such a definition is necessarily self-referential, as are all statements
> of the form "I tell you who we are".
> 
> > If you mean by that all those who truly "believe" in the GPL gospel then I
> > am and maybe half of the rest of the Linux world are outside of the
> > free software community.
> 
> Given the above, the set of Free Software contains the set of GPL-ed software.
> So, the question is not whether you are a believer in the GPL gospel, but
> whether you are a producer of Free Software as defined by the DGPL, and thus
> a member of the Free Software Community.
> 
> You're the one with the religeous training. Where are the flaws in this?
> 
> 	Thanks
> 
> 	Bruce
> -- 
> Can you get your operating system fixed when you need it?
> Linux - the supportable operating system. http://www.debian.org/support.html
> Bruce Perens K6BP   bruce@debian.org   NEW PHONE NUMBER: 510-620-3502
> 
> 
> --
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
> debian-private-request@lists.debian.org . 
> Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
> 
> 
> 


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-private-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .