Re: Combining proprietary code and GPL for in-house use
On 27 Jun 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>John Galt <galt@inconnu.isu.edu> writes:
>
>> JESUS H CHRIST ON A POGO STICK!!!! WHAT is your major malfuction? It's
>> not good enough for you to start on your "John Galt's not part of Debian"
>> kick, but you now have to start on others?! I have some suggestions for
>> the horse you rode in on: I have serious doubts as to whether you're
>> physically capable of the acts I'd require of you. Next time I see this
>> shit, I'm going to have a long talk with the Tech Comittee and DPL: this
>> is out of line and I've a feeling most people know it. Keep slinging your
>> stones at me, twit, because everyone else here is too good for the likes
>> of you.
>
>You just don't get it. Debian is not your little whipping boy to poke
>at and mock from afar. You don't do us even the most basic of minimal
No it isn't. Debian's one of my favorite distros, and I hate to see it
being brought down by the likes of you. Every time you tell someone that
they aren't a part of Debian, at least one person (more likely five or
six: people have been known to listen) is lost to Debian, possibly
forever. Every time I get on a rant, at least one person is disgusted
with ME and probably learns how to use a killfile. In my case, there may
be some collateral attrition, but I figure that the attrition is going to
happen anyway: can you feature someone who is so disgusted with the whole
of the Debian project because of one of my rants not being disgusted with
any of about a dozen others? I'm a symptom of a larger disease, you're
the only one who consistently plays the "you aren't in Debian" card.
>courtesies of introducing yourself, and you antagonize everyone in the
This tired old tripe again? Why don't you get it through your head that
for all intents and purposes, the only name I will ever use within Debian
is John Galt? You know, it's this kind of hassle that bothers me the most
about Debian. Not the fact that you hassle me: I can live with that. The
fact that any pseudonymous person would have a similar hassle. The fact
that there's always people like yourself that are more than willing to
push somebody out because they aren't "like them". Perhaps your biggest
peeve with Hoffman isn't whether they are wrong or right, it's because
their Finger information lists them as "none". It does fit with your
constant _ad hominem_ attacks against me...
>Project, and you have the temerity to say this? Get off your high
>horse.
MY high horse? Who's attempting to drum out yet another victim?
>And you're *not* part of Debian. Does that fact bother you?
Whether or not >I< am a part of Debian, if I ever catch you attempting to
exclude another person, I will stop at nothing to see you bodily removed
from Debian, preferably with my bootprint on your ass. The fact that I am
not a part of Debian bothers me just enough that I hate to see people who
play exclusionary games with Debian.
>> Au contraire. Subversion of licenses is fair: look at the OpenSSL debate
>> (round 1, a few months ago).
>
>I didn't say it was unfair. I said it was unfriendly. I'm not the
>friend of Microsoft; I have no problem subverting their licenses. But
>someone who subverts the GPL for the aid of anti-free-software forces
>is our enemy.
Who cares about the fairness of the action, I was talking about fair
versus foul (in bounds versus out of bounds to be more precise). You said
that talking about subversions of the GPL was foul, yet not too many
months ago there was a thread about rewriting OpenSSL (which I note that
is now an ongoing project on ftp.gnu.org...). Since I participated in
this discussion, I obviously don't see it as foul. Just so you know,
legality really has little to do with fairness in the sense you were using
it.
I doubt the veracity, but I cannot doubt that there was little regard for
fairness...
>> >people might subvert the GPL, so that the FSF can fix them, then you
>> >should bring such issues up in private with the FSF. Bringing them up
>>
>> When did Debian get reattached to the FSF? Why should Debian care what
>> the FSF thinks (other than as much as Debian should care about any Open
>> Source source [pun intended])?
>
>Debian has absolutely no control over the text of the GPL. If you are
>our friend, and you think a change to the GPL would improve it, then
>you simply have to talk to the FSF, because only the FSF can change
>the GPL.
I think I alluded to this fact once... This IS an old topic, and I've
spoken about it at length. Let it suffice to say that it is NOT
complimentary to the FSF that this is true.
>> Neither is netiquette-nazism, but this is the umpteenth message that
>> you've sent today on the subject.
>
>Is that Godwin I hear fluttering in the breeze?
http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame1.html
--
I can be immature if I want to, because I'm mature enough to make my own
decisions.
Who is John Galt? galt@inconnu.isu.edu
Reply to: