3 ms·

Let's be very clear, this is from gnu.org, so this is not "open source crusaders", this is "free software zealots". There are no compromises when it comes to Fr

by cmsj 6y ago

Let's be very clear, this is from gnu.org, so this is not "open source crusaders", this is "free software zealots". There are no compromises when it comes to Free Software, no pragmatism and no leeway for choices to be made that serve a purpose if they reduce the freedom of the software. I am not explicitly criticising GNU/FSF, but I think it's important to remember that they are always going to take the most extreme view on these matters, because that's why those projects exist. (personally I see FSF/RMS as a lighthouse. I find their presence useful for navigation, but I don't necessarily want to get too close to them ;)

systemvoltage 6y ago
It provokes me so much. This is a horrible organization and a message for the open source community. MIT license > GPL which is a draconian piece of work. Linux needs a pragmatic, less asshole, more inclusive and approachable community. GNU guys aren’t helping.
belorn 6y ago
free software people will rewrite proprietary software under a free and open source license. Open source people will rewrite free software licensed software under a open source license. From a pragmatic perspective, I rather pick the former than the later, and the practical benefits are noticeable when going from a proprietary software to an free and open source version, but going from GPL to MIT has no meaningful impact on my ability to use the program. Talking about pragmatism, why do a weather app developers feel the need to get permission to access to my contact list, sms, my web browser history, and so on? It seems clear that regardless of what kind of software a developer, community or company do, there are political aspects that pushes away pragmatism. Simple programs that do a practical job and nothing else should be the norm, but there seems to always be a will to push it away from that.

by cmsj 6y ago

systemvoltage 6y ago

It provokes me so much. This is a horrible organization and a message for the open source community. MIT license > GPL which is a draconian piece of work. Linux needs a pragmatic, less asshole, more inclusive and approachable community. GNU guys aren’t helping.

belorn 6y ago

free software people will rewrite proprietary software under a free and open source license. Open source people will rewrite free software licensed software under a open source license. From a pragmatic perspective, I rather pick the former than the later, and the practical benefits are noticeable when going from a proprietary software to an free and open source version, but going from GPL to MIT has no meaningful impact on my ability to use the program. Talking about pragmatism, why do a weather app developers feel the need to get permission to access to my contact list, sms, my web browser history, and so on? It seems clear that regardless of what kind of software a developer, community or company do, there are political aspects that pushes away pragmatism. Simple programs that do a practical job and nothing else should be the norm, but there seems to always be a will to push it away from that.