Re: Debian and KDE: Appology
Paul Seelig wrote: On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 11:29:37AM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote: On Fri 08 Sep 2000, Paul Seelig wrote: RMS should IMHO publically apologize with the KDE people for this condescending part of his otherwise correct article. He should be So now _you_ are telling someone to ask for forgiveness? And *in this case* righfully so and without being derisive. What an ironic turn, isn't it? RMS was offering forgiveness for any FSF code that was infringed upon -- meaning nobody had to ask him for /anything/ -- and suggesting that the KDE developers ask for the same forgiveness from the developers of the GPL code they used (ostensibly only in two optional components, kmidi and kghostview), and which they lost legal access to by being in violation of its license. Somewhere along the line, this quite reasonable, non-derisive suggestion was turned into I demand you beg my personal forgiveness for violating the GPL, and by the way, GNOME is still going to bury you, which is completely derisive and completely unreasonable...and which never happened. -- | Jeff Teunissen - Pres., Dusk To Dawn Computing - deek at dusknet.dhs.org | Disclaimer: I am my employer, so anything I say goes for me too. :) | Core developer, The QuakeForge Projecthttp://www.quakeforge.net/ | Specializing in Debian GNU/Linux http://dusknet.dhs.org/~deek/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and KDE: Appology
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Stallman) writes: Meanwhile, you don't seem to be concerned about the mob of people who are attacking me. On Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 06:06:53PM +0200, Paul Seelig wrote: I may now be even more concerned that you seem to consider the authors of free KDE software a mob. Or maybe you are simply confusing a mob with the KDE authors? Paul: what information do you have, which shows that this mob is really only the KDE authors? -- Raul -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and KDE: Appology
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 11:20:01PM -0600, Richard Stallman wrote: I think you ought to apologize, for supporting this mob. I have no reason to apologize for being its victim. I, on behalf of everyone involved in the GPL KDE fiasco, humbly apologize to everyone else for the actions, comitted by us, that were wrong, evil, mean, untactful, arrogant, flamebait, and downright stupid, whether you like it or not. I, on behalf of everyone involved in the GPL KDE fiasco, accept your apology, whether you like it or not. Now quit filling up my mailbox with flames from old grudges that clearly have no more significance in the world of coding today. I demand that for every further word of flamage on this topic, on *or* off the lists, that the participant write and release a minimum of ten-thousand lines of source-available software. By reading, learning about, referencing, or otherwise obtaining or not obtaining the information in this message, you agree to be bound its terms, under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act and/or the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act, whether you like it or not. Translation: You, yes YOU, that's right, I'm talking to *YOU*! Shut up and code! Shut up and code! Shut up and code! (It helps you remember.) -- Dwayne C. Litzenberger - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists. - See the mail headers for GPG/advertising/homepage information. pgpbPIpMmYwGw.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Debian and KDE: Appology
You are picking at little details of my words, reading into them a hostility which is not there. Meanwhile, you don't seem to be concerned about the mob of people who are attacking me. To me that says injustice and double standard. Injustice, because you blame me for meanings that others project into my words; double standard, because you exonerate them for real nastiness while blaming me for imaginary nastiness. I think you ought to apologize, for supporting this mob. I have no reason to apologize for being its victim. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and KDE: Appology
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 01:19:06PM -0300, Ben Woodhead wrote: First I would like to give my appologies, I was not aware of the incomming directory and I have been told that kde will be included. I would also like to say that I personally do not use kde nor am a developer for them, my consern was with the conflicts between linux. Competition is a good thing, unless its taken to far and as of yet I have not seen anybody that was talking about the lisence tell the community that the problem has been resolved and we are glad to hear it. This was never about competition or trying to rag on KDE because of Gnome. It was always about licensing. The licensing issues are resolved, so KDE is being uploaded. ps I did not mean it in a flaming sort of way, although re-reading the letter gave me that feeling, please make a statement to the community, you are a very important part of it, and as of yet debian has not made a comment, FSF made a condesending comment (I don't know if it was afficial or not but its been on the top of every news site). Richard's comment was apparently on the order of It's about time, which apparently managed to peeve the KDE people who felt they needed to flame him publicly over it.. *sigh* 3 years from now we will still be seeing this argument. People such as yourself who don't know the whole story before they start writing, and those who deliberately wish to troll for flames. Fortunately, my part of it is done - KDE is being uploaded to Debian now to join Qt in main. Unfortunately, not by any action of KDE. Troll Tech made the decision. KDE and Debian both benefit. I can speak for a sizable portion of Debian when I say regardless of how the resolution came about, we're happy with it (and in fact, most of us are absolutely delighted that Qt is now available under the GPL, even if it means that KDE essentially did nothing to clean up their own mess..) The argument is over, despite some lingering distrust. It's time for KDE to get back to coding and Debian to get back to packaging. Show's over, nothing to see here, move along. -- Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG key 1024D/DCF9DAB3 Debian GNU/Linux (http://www.debian.org/) 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC The QuakeForge Project (http://quakeforge.net/) 44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3 BenC -include ../../debian/el33t.h BenC sendmail build...strange header name :) isildur hahaha * netgod laffs netgod BenC: can u tell i used to maintain sendmail? :P BenC heh :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and KDE: Appology
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:52:04PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote: Fortunately, my part of it is done - KDE is being uploaded to Debian now to join Qt in main. Unfortunately, not by any action of KDE. Troll Tech made the decision. KDE and Debian both benefit. I can speak for a sizable portion of Debian when I say regardless of how the resolution came about, we're happy with it (and in fact, most of us are absolutely delighted that Qt is now available under the GPL, even if it means that KDE essentially did nothing to clean up their own mess..) While I agree with most of your points, I must point out that Troll fixing this is far the right solution than KDE changing their licensing. If you like, I can go into details, but I'd prefer to keep that to private email -- the details don't in any way enhance debian development. Thanks, -- Raul -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and KDE: Appology
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:52:04PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote: Richard's comment was apparently on the order of It's about time, which apparently managed to peeve the KDE people who felt they needed to flame him publicly over it.. *sigh* It was not the harmless about time part those people got angry about. They IMHO righfully complained about RMS' forgiving talk which is more like religious speech from a church or something. If the catholic pope would utter such words it could be silently ignored, though it would be appropriate speech in his ideological context. But RMS speaking like *this* is rather unappropriate and IMHO quite insulting. I wonder if the author of ncftp who was hurting the GPL by using readline and who subsequently put ncftp under GPL as consequence of complaints was asked to beg for being forgiven as well? I guess not, it was just retroactively considered legal, right? Is this then just treatment of the KDE developers? Definitely not! RMS should IMHO publically apologize with the KDE people for this condescending part of his otherwise correct article. He should be wise enough to be careful about the context in which other people might consider certain statements simply derisive. Thank you, P. *8^) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and KDE: Appology
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 11:01:37AM +0200, Paul Seelig wrote: On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:52:04PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote: Richard's comment was apparently on the order of It's about time, which apparently managed to peeve the KDE people who felt they needed to flame him publicly over it.. *sigh* It was not the harmless about time part those people got angry about. They IMHO righfully complained about RMS' forgiving talk which is more like religious speech from a church or something. no, it was a legal forgiveness of past violations - i read it as a declaration that, on behalf of the FSF, he was willing to put the past behind him and move on now that the license problem has been resolved. But RMS speaking like *this* is rather unappropriate and IMHO quite insulting. I wonder if the author of ncftp who was hurting the GPL by using readline and who subsequently put ncftp under GPL as consequence of complaints was asked to beg for being forgiven as well? I guess not, it was just retroactively considered legal, right? Is this then just treatment of the KDE developers? Definitely not! the KDE legal fiasco has been a much bigger and much more public problem than the ncftp/readline problem, and took a lot longer to sort out too - the ncftp author immediately relicensed ncftp under the GPL when the problem was pointed out to him. because of the long and bitter public debates, RMS had to say something and he had to make a public statement that it was now OK for KDE to use any FSF owned code. if he had just ignored the fact that the KDE/Qt/GPL problem had finally been resolved then he would have had people (you, perhaps?) slagging him off for being stand-offish and rude. RMS should IMHO publically apologize with the KDE people for this condescending part of his otherwise correct article. He should be wise enough to be careful about the context in which other people might consider certain statements simply derisive. some KDE people should apologise to RMS for being over-sensitive ungracious brats. craig -- craig sanders -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and KDE: Appology
On Fri 08 Sep 2000, Paul Seelig wrote: about. They IMHO righfully complained about RMS' forgiving talk which is more like religious speech from a church or something. If the catholic pope would utter such words it could be silently ignored, though it would be appropriate speech in his ideological context. Well, he *does* consider himself a saint; from his page http://www.stallman.org/saint.html : Stallman is a saint in the Church of Emacs---Saint IGNUcius. :-) But RMS speaking like *this* is rather unappropriate and IMHO quite insulting. I wonder if the author of ncftp who was hurting the GPL by He _is_ sometimes a bit tactless, but gets his point across. Unfortunately, because he's such a prominent figure, people react strongly to him or are otherwise more critical of anything he does or says. RMS should IMHO publically apologize with the KDE people for this condescending part of his otherwise correct article. He should be So now _you_ are telling someone to ask for forgiveness? Paul Slootman (not a follower of RMS myself) -- home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wurtel.demon.nl/ work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.murphy.nl/ debian: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ isdn4linux: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.isdn4linux.de/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and KDE: Appology
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 11:29:37AM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote: On Fri 08 Sep 2000, Paul Seelig wrote: RMS should IMHO publically apologize with the KDE people for this condescending part of his otherwise correct article. He should be So now _you_ are telling someone to ask for forgiveness? And *in this case* righfully so and without being derisive. What an ironic turn, isn't it? No, i don't use even a single Qt/KDE program. Thanks, P. *8^) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and KDE: Appology
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 08:24:30PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: [ just more of the same ] because of the long and bitter public debates, RMS had to say something and he had to make a public statement that it was now OK for KDE to use any FSF owned code. if he had just ignored the fact that the KDE/Qt/GPL problem had finally been resolved then he would have had people (you, perhaps?) slagging him off for being stand-offish and rude. The problem is IMHO that he didn't *just* had to make a public statement that it was now OK for KDE to use any FSF owned code, which he then rightly did. He applied IMHO double standards by asking KDE developers to beg for forgiving and *this* is IMHO being stand-offish and rude. RMS (like anybody) definitely has the right to forgive but expecting and asking others to beg for being forgiven is at best derisive. Without being a KDE/Qt user myself, this is what makes me understand the anger of the KDE developers. Thank you, P. *8^) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and KDE: Appology
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 11:01:37AM +0200, Paul Seelig wrote: Richard's comment was apparently on the order of It's about time, which apparently managed to peeve the KDE people who felt they needed to flame him publicly over it.. *sigh* It was not the harmless about time part those people got angry about. They IMHO righfully complained about RMS' forgiving talk which is more like religious speech from a church or something. If the catholic pope would utter such words it could be silently ignored, though it would be appropriate speech in his ideological context. I've simply learned to accept that Richard has an ego the size of a moderately sized country and expects the whole community to bow at his feet. (rebel fleet award to han solo anyone? (you'd have to have been at the Aug 1999 LWCE for the $25k award that Debian received this year.. The FSF got the award last year and he was actually resentful that these people were handing him a fat chunk of cash to help him do the things he does because he felt it wasn't enough recognition/credit!)) But RMS speaking like *this* is rather unappropriate and IMHO quite insulting. I wonder if the author of ncftp who was hurting the GPL by using readline and who subsequently put ncftp under GPL as consequence of complaints was asked to beg for being forgiven as well? I guess not, it was just retroactively considered legal, right? Is this then just treatment of the KDE developers? Definitely not! Oh I am perfectly comfortable in saying that I believe the KDE developers have a lot to answer for over the past three years. They have been both intentionally disruptive and destructive to the community because of their own arrogance. Richard's own unjustifyable arrogance adds just one more whining windbag's ego to the pile of the bruised. So yes, he's guilty of flamebait. And the Linux media is guilty of helping him spread it. Big deal, just because the person trolling is a public figure doesn't change the fact that saying a group of coders should beg forgiveness for their transgressions against the church of GNU is still trolling. RMS should IMHO publically apologize with the KDE people for this condescending part of his otherwise correct article. He should be wise enough to be careful about the context in which other people might consider certain statements simply derisive. He won't. C'mon, this is Richard Stallman. In his own eyes, everything he says and does is righteous and pure. IMO, this makes him as dangerous as Eric Raymond. (But then, my opinions of RMS as a leader aren't terribly popular around here... I do freely admit my own ego is too large to make me any better, so I am essentially throwing stones outside my glass house.) -- Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG key 1024D/DCF9DAB3 Debian GNU/Linux (http://www.debian.org/) 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC The QuakeForge Project (http://quakeforge.net/) 44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3 james abuse me. I'm so lame I sent a bug report to debian-devel-changes -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and KDE: Appology
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 11:56:06AM +0200, Paul Seelig wrote: Without being a KDE/Qt user myself, this is what makes me understand the anger of the KDE developers. The problem with that is that the KDE developers have chosen to assume that because Richard has been an ass to them (and quite clearly, he has been), that anyone who agrees with him deserves the same response they'd give to him. This is why I eventually decided the whole KDE mess was a losing battle. As long as the KDE developers were unwilling to entertain the concept of a problem, there could be no resolution short of the impossible (which has now happened..) -- Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG key 1024D/DCF9DAB3 Debian GNU/Linux (http://www.debian.org/) 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC The QuakeForge Project (http://quakeforge.net/) 44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3 Davide how bout a policy policing policy with a policy for changing the police policing policy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and KDE: Appology
Paul Seelig [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But RMS speaking like *this* is rather unappropriate and IMHO quite insulting. I wonder if the author of ncftp who was hurting the GPL by using readline and who subsequently put ncftp under GPL as consequence of complaints was asked to beg for being forgiven as well? I guess not, it was just retroactively considered legal, right? Is this then just treatment of the KDE developers? Definitely not! The situation does differ somewhat: ncftp's violations were resolved by actions taken by ncftp's author. KDE's violations were resolved by actions taken by Troll Tech, _not_ actions taken by KDE developers. So whether you think the request for an apology is appropriate or not, using the events surrounding ncftp as a basis for saying RMS is applying a double standard is dubious, because the resolutions came about through very different means. Mike. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and KDE: Appology
At 10:14 AM 9/8/00 -0400, Michael Alan Dorman wrote: Paul Seelig [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But RMS speaking like *this* is rather unappropriate and IMHO quite insulting. I wonder if the author of ncftp who was hurting the GPL by using readline and who subsequently put ncftp under GPL as consequence of complaints was asked to beg for being forgiven as well? I guess not, it was just retroactively considered legal, right? Is this then just treatment of the KDE developers? Definitely not! The situation does differ somewhat: ncftp's violations were resolved by actions taken by ncftp's author. KDE's violations were resolved by actions taken by Troll Tech, _not_ actions taken by KDE developers. In addition, when it was pointed out to ncftp's author, he acknowledged the issue and resolved it. When it was pointed out to KDE, they denied that there was a problem (and -still- deny that there was a problem). So whether you think the request for an apology is appropriate or not, using the events surrounding ncftp as a basis for saying RMS is applying a double standard is dubious, because the resolutions came about through very different means. And the actions of the FSF in both cases is identical: when the issue was resolved, the FSF dropped any potential legal claim against the violators they may have had. That action in both cases is consistent with the FSF's stated goals, and RMS's stated ethical position. Mike. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
