Re: Lost Trust
Marek Habersack <grendel@debian.org> writes:
> On Mon, May 31, 2004 at 06:09:14PM -0800, D. Starner scribbled:
> > > > 1) It encourages free alternatives to be written.
> > > Everytime I see some smartass writing that, I wish they would actually
> > > damned code that alternative. Then and ONLY then they have the right to
> > > remove anything.
> >
> > If I upload AutoCAD, will you oppose removing it? Part of what makes the
> If there is no alternative? No, I wouldn't oppose it then.
And you'd be willing to sacrifice the whole "free as beer" thing? I guess
it's all in being flexible.
> I would be glad
> there was AutoCAD in Debian, since then I could put Debian on my sister's
> machine (which needs AutoCAD, 3DMax and ArchiCAD, none of which exist under
> Linux OSes)
What's stopping you has nothing to do with Debian. It has to do with the
fact that proprietary software makers have chosen not to let you port
the software.
In any case, there's several examples of this being bad for Free Software.
Every computer science undergrad writes a raytracer at some point in time.
So why does there not exists a good free raytracer if it's so simple? Because
POV-Ray sucked away the people who would implement it. Likewise there's no
really comprehensive fractal drawer, because FractInt is good enough.
> Take a really critical look at all
> the free software around - the crap/value ratio is scaringly high. There are
> loads of unfinished, half-finished or simply bad projects, many of them
> duplicating the efforts of the others.
Duh. If you look at software outside free software, you'll find that the crap/value
ratio is scaringly high, and that there's loads of unfinished, half-finished or
simply bad projects, many of them duplicating the efforts of the others. Of course,
commericial software buries many of the unfinished projects. If sourceforge went
through and deleted all the unfinished projects, that might change your ratios, but
wouldn't make the quality of software in use any higher.
> Look
> for instance at KOffice, OpenOffice and AbiWord. They all duplicate their
> efforts - just imagine what could happen if they all worked together.
800 megs and constantly swapping? Sure wouldn't run on my machine. That's
why I tend to use AbiWord. They target different audiences to some extent,
and even to the extent they target the same audience, it's a good thing.
Competition is a good thing.
In any case, the commerical market has a number of word processors, ranging
from Word, WordPerfect and StarOffice, to hordes of minor players written
for one field or language.
> Let's go farther - the X Window issue. We have, at this
> moment, 3 versions of X11 around - X.org's, the fdo's kdrive one, and
> xfree86 - now isn't it a waste of valuable energy and human resources?
So should we point guns at those volunteers who just couldn't work with
xfree86 anymore and force them to deal with it? If they couldn't work
on kdrive, what makes you think they would go back to working on xfree86?
But let's go farther. Look at all of the Linux distributions. Isn't Debian
just a waste of valuable energy and human resources?
> This
> fragmentation of efforts is what leads to a situation in which there are no
> real alternatives to AutoCAD, ArchiCAD or 3DMax on the free side of the
> software world
I actually would rather guess that it's because those are very large, complex
programs that have evolved over a decade. I seriously doubt that if you marched
stormtroopers in and reorganized the Linux world, that an AutoCAD workalike would
appear any quicker.
> And removing
> any drivers/firmware from the OS kernel doesn't help that situation.
If we should use a free kernel, why shouldn't we make sure that kernel
is all free?
> we cannot offer replacements to all the software that is needed
> at this moment.
That's what we have non-free for.
> That's why a sensible compromise is a must, and stiffly
> sticking to the DFSG or ideals won't do much good if people turn their backs
> on us (and rightly so).
If we abandon our ideals everytime they become sticky, they aren't worth much.
We have a sensible compromise; it's called non-free.
> Flexibility is really a great virtue.
It's also a great vice. People don't trust people who are flexible with thier
ethics; they may say they mean something today, but when the going gets tough,
they change their mind. If we make a promise to uphold the DFSG, and break it
here, how can people who make a business out of baby-mulchers running on Debian
trust that there's no software in main that can't be used by buisnesses or
baby-mulchers?
--
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
Reply to: