Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Well, the fact that he doesn't control gnucash.org or any of the > servers that run gnucash infrastructure I think would be a major > impediment. Nothing would stop him from creating a fork, but I > doubt anyone would follow there instead of using what comes from > gnucash.org.
It sounds like you're saying "who cares if he starts a war; it will only do a little damage." I think this is short-sighted. Friendly relations with RMS are worth trying to keep. Of course, if he demands something unreasonable, then we may have to stand our ground and refuse. But I don't think the current request is unreasonable. It's worth bending on for the sake of peace. > I think the proper response to RMS is "thank you for your concern. > We've added the link to gnu.org." And just leave it at that. I > don't think we should even mention the "Free" vs. "Open Source" > in a reply. Well, I think independently that we should say "free". The term "open source" was, in fact, created as a deliberate attempt to slap RMS in the face, and I think he is rightly bothered by it. It is certainly not any clearer than "free software". The term by itself only denotes "you can look at the source"; it does not (by the grammar of the phrase) say anything about any freedoms. In addition, the OSI has certified patently non-free licenses as open source, making things worse. Thomas _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel