To be very precise, there isn't a Free alternative to gcc yet. If the GNU folks will continue with the whole GNU/Linux thing, I might just get bugged enough to write a BSD licensed compiler.
Does that mean you would have absolutely no problem at all in exploitative corporates taking your hard work, (sometimes) turning it into crap and making a huge pile of cash on it ?
Talking about freedom and practicing it is not just a momentary thing but has to be a continuous and perpetual struggle. If we leave the option for people to take what they want and commercialise it, they will never bother about freedom and the cause is diminished.
If the restriction of keeping the released work also free is put, it makes them at least consult lawyers and think on ``Why did this person/group decide to do things this way ?" and that is the beginning of victory because you start to make people think about things they otherwise take for granted. That's the stuff revolutions are made of.
Then of course we are in a philosophical quandary of ``restricting freedom to preserve freedom". My simple answer to that is, GPL has proved that it CAN work and IS working.
But my whole point is that GNU/Linux is pretty much useless to me.
Regardless of how essential gcc is. If the GNU project gets credits, everyone else deserves the same amount of time.
Hmm... is it not so that in all GNU projects painstaiking efforts are made to credit every single person who contributed to any project. In fact in the GNU C manual itself they are about 20 odd pages in the pdf crediting every person individually with the work they did. This includes BSD guys who did the BSD ports. This happens irrespective of what the personal beliefs are(i don't recall seeing a tag near anyone's name stating with GNU or without GNU :-) )
Therefore when credit is given to a community, it is every single individual that has worked who is actually credited. Moreover, and correct me if i'm wrong, but GNU was the first movement to credit every person involved with a software project in a public manner.
Dispensing with the GPL? Definitely. Dispensing with the GNU project?
Right now, other than the compiler, what else do you need to get a full BSD userland? My thesis is that Linux != GNU/Linux and there are other projects which deserve equal time in the OS name.
If you truely feel that way and are passionate about freedom, you could start a movement to do the same telling people that ``Zero restriction freedom is true freedom" and you could also perhaps call it GING(GING Is Not GNU) if you are not fond of G's, but love B's you could call it BING(BING Is Not GNU) which actually sounds quite neat :-)
Regards,
- vihan
On 12/10/06 11:38 +0530, Vihan Pandey wrote:
To be very precise, there isn't a Free alternative to gcc yet. If the GNU folks will continue with the whole GNU/Linux thing, I might just get bugged enough to write a BSD licensed compiler.
Does that mean you would have absolutely no problem at all in exploitative corporates taking your hard work, (sometimes) turning it into crap and making a huge pile of cash on it ?
No. I use enough BSD licensed software to know how the BSD community works. Given the popularity of web services, DRM and closed hardware (how many people here use nvidia's drivers?), I don't really the GPLv2 as giving a specific advantage to end users. The one way to get around the requirements for distributing source is not to distribute it at all, but only provide public APIs (or protocols) to allow access to your code.
Talking about freedom and practicing it is not just a momentary thing but has to be a continuous and perpetual struggle. If we leave the option for people to take what they want and commercialise it, they will never bother about freedom and the cause is diminished.
Please note that I have no issues with commercialising code. Nor does the FSF. Both of us have issues with closing source for the second level of users. The _sole_ reason I would be using the BSD license would be to keep the GNU zealots away. <snip>
Hmm... is it not so that in all GNU projects painstaiking efforts are made to credit every single person who contributed to any project. In fact in the
And should I not then give equal credit to every project which has contributed to my Linux system?
GNU C manual itself they are about 20 odd pages in the pdf crediting every person individually with the work they did. This includes BSD guys who did the BSD ports. This happens irrespective of what the personal beliefs are(i don't recall seeing a tag near anyone's name stating with GNU or without GNU :-) )
Therefore when credit is given to a community, it is every single individual that has worked who is actually credited. Moreover, and correct me if i'm wrong, but GNU was the first movement to credit every person involved with a software project in a public manner.
Saying GNU/Linux deprives the other communities of that credit.
Devdas Bhagat
On 12-Oct-06, at 11:38 AM, Vihan Pandey wrote:
Does that mean you would have absolutely no problem at all in exploitative corporates taking your hard work, (sometimes) turning it into crap and making a huge pile of cash on it ?
strange as it may seem to some people, the danger of people 'pirating' software and making more profit than the developer is practically non-existent. Any moron stupid enough to pirate software would not have the brains to develop and support it in a better manner than the original user. (This is different in the case of one closed source guy pirating anothers). Why pay for a cheap duplicate when the original is available free and supported by the creator. I personaly am all for giving anyone the freedom to do anything whatsoever with my software - because all I am doing is giving him the freedom to hang himself. And, if i am short of funds i can always sue him for violation of copyright ;-)
On Thursday 12 October 2006 11:38, Vihan Pandey wrote:
To be very precise, there isn't a Free alternative to gcc yet. If the GNU folks will continue with the whole GNU/Linux thing, I might just get bugged enough to write a BSD licensed compiler.
Does that mean you would have absolutely no problem at all in exploitative corporates taking your hard work, (sometimes) turning it into crap and making a huge pile of cash on it ?
Such corporates are technically very disadvantaged and wind up on the rubbish pile after sometime - according to the bsd developers (and i agree with this logic). And freedom is freedom even if it is the freedom to shoot others with your weapon - which imo is rather counter intutive with daily reality.
-
Devdas Bhagat -
jtd -
Kenneth Gonsalves -
Vihan Pandey