4 ms·
So they in fact talk about freedom with using the word on their home page. That is exactly my point.
by haroldp 11y ago
So they in fact talk about freedom with using the word on their home page. That is exactly my point.
- prodigal_erik 11y agorms' statement was > The Clang and LLVM developers reach different conclusions from ours because they do not share our values and goals. They object to the measures we have taken to defend freedom because they see the inconvenience of them and do not recognize (or don't care about) the need for them. I would guess they describe their work as "open source" and do not talk about freedom. If you're objecting to that, well, where do they talk about freedom? I'm saying rms appears to be correct because I can't find anything they have to say about the issue. I searched more than the homepage.
- haroldp 11y agoRMS is wrong on this issue, and wrong in a very insulting way. OSS programmers who disagree with him about license must not talk or (care) about freedom? Really? Jesus that's shitty.
- isolate 11y agoRMS uses "freedom" to mean "the best thing you can have", kind of like, but also kind of opposite to, the way people use "freedom" to describe America. It's just propaganda, who cares. Many people view permissive licenses as more free, whatever, it's a buzzword.
- prodigal_erik 11y agoI get that you don't like what rms observed about the Clang and LLVM developers, but you haven't cited anything from them that would show him to be mistaken.