Re: RH and GNOME
> > > So far, Red Hat as been pretty consistent about licensing everything
> > > with GNU's GPL. Considering some of the recent discussions here, they
> > > might even be more solidly in support of GNU's GPL than we are.
> >
> > Are you mad? RedHat doesn't even acknowledge the GNU component of their
> > system. `RedHat Linux', not `Gnu Linux'.
>
> Semantics.
Not semantics. I don't remember where off the top of my head, but I
believe GNU expressed its wishes to have a Gnu/Linux system known as such,
rather than just Linux. Of course, we're not going to call it
Gnu/BSD/Xfree/Bind/.../Linux, but GNU has contributed very major parts of
the system -- parts that, honestly, there wouldn't BE a system without.
This is a digression, so I'll trim back onto the subject.
> >
> > I trust RedHat about as far as I can spit, and not that far.
> >
>
> Your privilege. But when you talk like that, you aren't speaking for
> Debian, just youself.
Nor do I claim to speak for Debian. Do I have `Debian Spokesdragon' in my
signature or my `Real Name' field? No.
> > > Personally, I'd like to see us working more closely with Red Hat.
> > > But to do that, we'd need to come up with a package management system
> > > that could work with packages from either system. At the moment that
> > > would mean dpkg being able to install both deb and rpm, transparently
> > > (getting this to work would be easy compared to the prerequisite of
> > > understanding dpkg as a whole and addressing its bugs and inefficiencies).
> > > Of course, maybe Bruce will solve this by trumping both of us.
> >
> > I like the way someone else said it best... (Whoevers quote this is, I
> > hope you don't mind me using it :) `The day RedHat switches to dpkg is the
> > day we have a unifyed package format'.
> >
>
> That's bigoted. We use dpkg at the moment because it has concrete
> advantages over RPM. If another system were proposed which encompassed
> our requirements, and enabled us to share packages with RedHat, that would
> be a *huge* advantage.
That's like sharing underwear with a leper.
> > > The strength of Linux is that we're a free software community.
> > > That means the competition is non-free software, not free software.
> > > Red Hat is on our side, I believe. So is Cygnus. So is FSF.
> >
> > RedHat, being a commercial company with interests ranging only in making
> > money (And to do this, they have to maintain their reputation -- which is
> > why they want to come off as benifiting the free software community), is
> > on no-ones side but their own.
> >
>
> That is very nearly libellous. There may well be some people in RedHat
> who think like that. And, yes, they need money to feed their families.
> But they *do* release their distribution for free download, and they *do*
> GPL the work they do. So they are on our side.
First you say what I say is libellous, and then you agree with my whole
point, summing it up with a disagreement of MY OWN summation! Amusing.
> > > For that matter, even non-free outfits (Corel, Caldera, Sun, Microsoft,
> > > etc.) can be on our side, though obviously some are much more helpful
> > > than others. [But that's another rather involved thread.]
> >
> > You -must- be joking.
>
> He's not. But I'm not going to bother to argue the point. It seems
> obvious enough to me.
>
> It is my opinion - and I have seen this backed up on debian-private - that
> there is no place in debian for anti-redhat feelings. It's chauvinism,
> really. Sure, joke about them as much as you like - but I cannot agree
> with the sentiments of your email.
I didn't ask you to. :>
You -Know- RH is slimy when they've got insiders here, too. ;>
(Seriously, that's more of a joke than anything else - I'm not paranoid,
I'm just an idealist)
> Jules
-Kysh
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: