Re: Dissatisfied w/Debian? Make something 'pure'.
>tb@MIT.EDU (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
>
>> Chip Salzenberg <chip@valinux.com> writes:
>>
>> > The DFSG is written, clear, and (intended to be) unambiguous. It is
>> > therefore superior to RMS's Daily Update as a project yardstick.
>>
>> Again, that's unfair. He has not changed his definition, which
>> essentially matches the DFSG; his definition has remained unchanged as
>> has the DFSG.
>
>Ah, but his emphases certainly do change. He's now against using the LGPL
>even for libraries, and the proposed GR seems to be a reflex of the same
>hardening of attitude towards non-free software.
Gee, we've ``discussed'' the definition on the word ``vandalism'',
now shall we launch a discussion on the word ``changing''?? 8)
BTW, I don't think RMS ``changed''. Everything on the world
changing, but RMS stands still for Freedom. 8) Those commercial
entities dealing w/ linux changed from dealing free
software to dealing with open source software, and some even
go so far as do commercial closed-sourced add-on!
what a shame!! or did the meaning of fame changed? anyways,
they're in the fame hall of nasdag, heheh.
___________________________________________________________________
ÐÂÏÊÈÈÀ±µÄ³±Á÷×ÊѶ£¬ÍøÒ×ÐÂÀ±Channel£º http://spicy.163.com
ÉÁ¿Í¾«Æ·£¬¾¡ÔÚÍøÒ×FLASHÕ¾£º http://desktop.163.com/flash
Reply to: