3 ms·

It's absolutely legitimate to have a F/OSS-licensed project with such a culture. But it shouldn't count as part of the F/OSS movement(s), any more than an MIT-l

by geofft 7y ago

It's absolutely legitimate to have a F/OSS-licensed project with such a culture. But it shouldn't count as part of the F/OSS movement(s), any more than an MIT-licensed website about how you need to pay SCO for Linux licenses would be part of the movement.

core-questions 7y ago
> But it shouldn't count as part of the F/OSS movement Why not? If the end result is a high quality piece of open source software, why do I need to care about the politics or behavior of the developers? The only reason I can think of would be from a risk-assessment standpoint, i.e. is another censorious asshole going to waltz on in and damage the team that produces this product so that it dies and becomes orphaned. Why anyone would want to contribute to a project they don't like the developers of is beyond me; either fork it or go do something else. It's not a requirement. This is not your livelihood, for the most part. Just walk away. Maybe if censorious assholes could just step the fuck off, and let people be, this would be less of a problem. As far as I can see, they've caused far more problems and far more discontent than anyone posting aggressively has ever done.
- geofft 7y ago
  You don't have to care, and I am not saying you should. I'm saying it doesn't count as part of the F/OSS movement. Whether you want to contribute, not contribute, etc. is your own choice and doesn't need to be correlated in any way.
  - JohnFen 7y ago
    How do you define the F/OSS movement?
JohnFen 7y ago
> But it shouldn't count as part of the F/OSS movement(s) Why not? Who gets to determine what counts as being part of the movement? I thought that, broadly speaking, the movement was about the method of producing and licensing software. If a certain group produces F/OSS software, but is internally abhorrent, they're still part of the F/OSS movement.

by geofft 7y ago

core-questions 7y ago

> But it shouldn't count as part of the F/OSS movement Why not? If the end result is a high quality piece of open source software, why do I need to care about the politics or behavior of the developers? The only reason I can think of would be from a risk-assessment standpoint, i.e. is another censorious asshole going to waltz on in and damage the team that produces this product so that it dies and becomes orphaned. Why anyone would want to contribute to a project they don't like the developers of is beyond me; either fork it or go do something else. It's not a requirement. This is not your livelihood, for the most part. Just walk away. Maybe if censorious assholes could just step the fuck off, and let people be, this would be less of a problem. As far as I can see, they've caused far more problems and far more discontent than anyone posting aggressively has ever done.

geofft 7y ago
You don't have to care, and I am not saying you should. I'm saying it doesn't count as part of the F/OSS movement. Whether you want to contribute, not contribute, etc. is your own choice and doesn't need to be correlated in any way.
- JohnFen 7y ago
  How do you define the F/OSS movement?

JohnFen 7y ago

> But it shouldn't count as part of the F/OSS movement(s) Why not? Who gets to determine what counts as being part of the movement? I thought that, broadly speaking, the movement was about the method of producing and licensing software. If a certain group produces F/OSS software, but is internally abhorrent, they're still part of the F/OSS movement.