On Sat, 31 May 2008 06:55:50 +0000 (UTC) PJ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Niyam wrote: > > > > > unless, are we supposed to merely agree with all-things linus, the > > > pied-piper on the gates of dawn? > > Gora Mohanty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > I don't know how starkly I can say this, but I will try: Linus > > doesn't owe anyone shit > > [snip] > > Well, actually, he does. If he's releasing stuff under GPL he's obliged > to ensure it is GPL compatible. Huh? How so? You are now making a claim that has not been voiced so far, namely that this is somehow in violation of the GPL. Admittedly without having looked into the details of any of this, I find this hard to believe. At the least, there would be much more of a stink about this, and if it were true, vehement opposition would indeed be in order. > Let's keep things in proportion here though. This is stuff that would likely > have got resolved done way or the other with clarity in the end. The current > alert over this is timely, and is speeding stuff up in a helpful and positive > way. Yes, indeed, let us keep things in proportion! My objection was not to the initial alert, but to the implication that it was somehow incumbent on the quote community unquote to take up cudgels on this issue. I will quote Niyam again in that context: On Wed, 28 May 2008 21:49:35 +0530 "Linux Lingam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > apart from PJ and arun, no response yet from the community on this. > wow! so much for endlessly and passionately debating value-systems > around foss all these years in our mailing lists and ilug-meets and > events. [...] (Niyam, I am quite aware that you often use hyperbole as a debating device, and this is *not* personally directed at you.) However, as it stands, the above statement pushes too many of my buttons to go without remark. As I said, the other place that I see such attitudes is from various corporate shills, and it usually goes along the lines of ABC corporation has done a wonderful piece of XYZ open-source work, and therefore the much-lauded community somehow owes them. Again, not to mince words: Screw that! To head off another endless line of arguments, I am not anti-corporate, only against such companies that seek to subvert FOSS to their own ends. And, believe me, Microsoft is hardly the only culprit there. > I note in passing that much of the disputed code is turning out to be > unpopular > or BSD licenced anyway (ie GPL compatible) so it looks like the kernel > releases > will be healthier than ever as a result of this. So the whole issue is IMO > very > Nietzschean in the sense of "if it doesn't kill you, it makes you stronger". I fail to understand how this gels with the rest of your message. I personally read it as the equivalent of "oh well, at least the smallpox blankets that we handed out did not kill so many people after all". Or, have you been staring into the abyss too long? Regards, Gora _______________________________________________ ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Next Event: http://freed.in - February 22-24, 2008 Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org/
