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.
>
> It wasn't 'GNU', it was RMS. And, I thought he was a bit silly at the
> time. It is only semantics. I'm not saying that we should change our
> name - I think 'Debian GNU/Linux' is a good name. It gives credit where
> it is due. But you can't really condemn RedHat for not following suit.
> It is more or less fundemental to the DFSG that I have the right to create
> a derivative work of Debian, name it what I like, and sell it (as long as
> I provide full source code, and the right to redistribute, to the end
> user).
One way or another, and after a few hours carefully reviewing the GPL with
some others, I've come to the conclusion that there are two sides to the
GPL: What people THINK it means and what it REALLY means.
> >
> > This is a digression, so I'll trim back onto the subject.
>
> True.
>
> >
> > > >
> > > > 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.
>
> Of course not. But I am making a serious point. Debian (and here, I am
> taking the liberty of speaking for the project [1]) does not need, or
> want, a reputation as 'RedHat-bashers'.
Again, I don't speak for debian, I speak for myself in a fairly internal
debian list.
> [ The dragon suggests an unwillingness to switch to a common 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.
>
> !
>
> I hardly think that deserves an answer. There have been many occasions
> when I've wished I could use an rpm (yes, I know about alien), and some
> commercial stuff is distributed as rpms (not that I use commercial
> software personally when I can avoid it - but this provides value to our
> users).
And why? Not because RPM is better, but because the author of the program
decided to release the binaries in .rpm format, just like the author of a
program could decide to release binaries in a shareware archive format --
There is no difference in comparison. RedHat has the quantity. We have the
quality.
> > > > > > 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. >
>
> I don't know about you Kysh, but I have to earn money, too. And I do it
> in computing. I daresay that's true for a notable proportion of debian
> developers. Believing in free software is *not* exclusive to making money
> in the computing industry.
I love pine.. I just hit some key that absolutely mangled the formatting
of the entire email. Ohwell.
No, absolutely not! I am (supposedly :P) a Unix system administrator.
Solaris and Linux, infact.
> > > > 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)
>
> OK. That's a joke. It's in pretty bad taste. I am not, in any sense, an
> RH insider - but I imagine there are RH people on this list - and why the
> hell shouldn't there be?
No reason, of course- Last I checked, it was a public(ly subscribable)
list.
Let me clarify something here.. I'm not even mentioning my personal views
(Which are that RedHat sucks as a distribution and a company, that they
wish to take advantage of an available and growing market by tapping in
a little at first, then slowly driving their wedge deeper and deeper
and turning the suction up until they've sucked all the sap for
themselves. But I'm not saying this, so don't worry about it)... I'm just
speaking in a purely observational tone. Not quite objective, though I've
looked at it from that angle, too.. but definitely not unfairly bashing
RedHat.
-Kysh
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: