Re: The "free software community" does not include Linus

[Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net>]

On Sat, 1 Nov 1997, Alex Yukhimets wrote:

> > On Sat, 1 Nov 1997, Alex Yukhimets wrote:
> > 
> > > I completely agree with that. And I guess substantial number of
> > > maintainers also agree. And please, don't tell me that
> > > overwhelming majority voted for DFSG which proves I am wrong.
> > > I myself also voted for DFSG by not for dogmatic approach to other
> > > software. Our methods must be flexible for sure, but even our goals
> > > should be flexible as time change lots of things.
> > > 
> > > Bruce, if you noticed the reaction of Debian community was
> > > mostly negative on you treatment of Debian+KDE thing. 
> > 
> > While I disagreed with Bruce's reaction, it was for very Dogmatic Free
> > Software reasons that I disagreed! If you voted for the DFSG, then you
> > voted for this dogma, as this is all that that document speaks to!
> 
> Well, Dale. This documents gives criteria for the software being 
> potentially portable, available, maintainable, etc. May be those criteria
> could be less strict in some aspects, but that's different and negotiable
> story. 

Well, if we are talking about re-negotiating the DFSG, you will find me to
be even more dogmatic than the current administration. I don't believe
that software can be entirely free if it has restrictions against sale of
the software. One of our "example" licenses, the Artistic License, has
clear "call outs" of this issue. While they allow the loophole of
"distribution costs" as a way to recover you efforts, I view this as a
slightly dishonest mechanism for appeasing those who will need to make an
income from distributing this software. "If you can't sell it, it ain't
free!" (and you can quote me on that ;-)

> 
> > 
> > > Doesn't it give you a clue that this dogamtic politics is not 
> > > popular (anymore). And even if you will be elected, that doesn't mean
> > > anything, unfortunatly we don't have a candidate from the "moderate"
> > > wing.
> > > 
> > If it doesn't mean anything to elect a Project Director, then what is the
> > point of holding an election. It seems very disigenuous to vote for an
> > idea and then declare that your vote doesn't mean anything.
> 
> May be you didn't understand what I meant, but the point was that even if
> Bruce wins the elections by huge margin, it would not mean that the same
> big majority which voted for him also voted for his dogmatic approach to
> DFSG. In case there will only be two currently declared candidates, I
> would vote for Bruce rather than for man who promises to sue anyone who
> would try to link with Motif his code! Wonderful example of the software
> being "free" if you can be convicted and lose your freedom for touching
> it.
Well, motif isn't free, but I get your point ;-) but, as I have argued
before, it is because the software we distribute is Free that other folks
have every right to use it as the foundation for a "less than free"
distribution. Those packages we place in "non-free" and "contrib" are
packages that, among other things, might restrict their use with other
classes of software.

>  
> Dale, why don't you declare your candidacy? This would be really great.
> 
Harvey Warwick asked me the same question a while ago, but I was still
under a "non-disclosure agreement" and was not free to speak openly. With
the release of the book that is no longer the case.

First, while I can probably do at least as good a job of "cat herding" as
Bruce does, those are not the only important attributes of a "Project
Director". Bruce has access to "industry contacts" that can make things
happen. (a good example is the "Open Hardare" initiative that Bruce has
recently started) In addition, Bruce is both willing and able to take time
out of his schedule to go to international conferences and speak on behalf
of Debian and the Free Software ideal. While I'm sure I could be coerced
into doing such things, I am too much of a hermit to really enjoy such
activities, aside from not having the resources to "jump on a plane" and
go somewhere.

Another point that, while it doesn't bother me, seems to be a problem for
some others. During one of the latest flame wars I was accused of
unethical behavior for both being a CD seller and trying to influence
Debian Policy. While I don't see it, there are real concernse to be
addressed here.

For instance, I know (from having talked with him about it) that my
publisher would be very happy to have me elected as the Project Director.
I'm sure he sees dollar signs behind such an event with reguard to book
sales. While it has the potential for putting more money in my pocket, I
can think of several "easier" ways to enhance my income that would be much
less painful than taking on the Directorship.

These issues don't strike me as "conflicts of interest", probably because
of my belief that it must be possible to sell Free Software, or it isn't
Free. My position is that everything I can do to sell more books, gets the
Debian distribution, along with the information I can impart in the book,
into another persons hands. This IS our goal.

The reason we should stress the Freedom of our software over the Quality
is that a Quality product that can't be used by some people because of 
some license restriction has no value, dispite its quality. It is part of
the Freedom of such software that profides the potential for such products
to aspire to quality.

My attraction to Free Software has as much to do with social engineering
as it does with software engineering. The Free Software model creates
"real wealth" without "capital investment". I am intrigued by the thought
that this model might be applied to other areas of manufacturing. It is my
considered opinion that this can not happen until there is a viable
philosophy, accepted by society, that can guide the operation of such an
economy. I see the philosophical underpinning for the Free Software
movement as having been created by RMS and the FSF, but implimented in an
appropriate development model by Linus and to a different degree by Ian
Murdock with his creation of the Debian distribution. The proof will take
some time to become apparent, but I think it is clear that Linux, and free
software in general, are beginning to make a real impact on the
"capitalist" side of the economics of software development. What this
means to the future is anyones guess.

As to the issue of my running for Project Director, I have no personal
interest as long as Bruce is still willing to serve. I am willing to serve
in any useful capacity, as the project is very important to me, but don't
see the project being served by my becoming a candidate.

Waiting is,

Dwarf
-- 
_-_-_-_-_-_-                                          _-_-_-_-_-_-_-

aka   Dale Scheetz                   Phone:   1 (904) 656-9769
      Flexible Software              11000 McCrackin Road
      e-mail:  dwarf@polaris.net     Tallahassee, FL  32308

_-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_-


--
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 .