3 ms·
>there's a whole history of Stallman intervention in the project and resulting idiotic architecture decisions behind why that's the case. Could you expand on t
by modo_mario 3y ago
>there's a whole history of Stallman intervention in the project and resulting idiotic architecture decisions behind why that's the case.
Could you expand on this?
I still see him in a somewhat positive light because whilst his aspergers makes him not an optimal face to an organization his dogmatism regarding free software and the FSF's efforts in court and elsewhere have proven largely a good thing imo and I don't really fault him for his corporate opponents that stem from that.
Meanwhile a lot of the accusations turned out weirdly fabricated which left me a bit of a bad taste, inconsequential or were regarding statements he'd apologized for and publicly changed his views on with explanation as to why and how.
- dale_glass 3y agoStallman can be blamed for the rise of Clang, basically. He for instance prominently refused to have GCC dump the full AST because of concerns of what people might do with that which could infringe on software freedom: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-01/msg00015.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-01/msg00... And that sort of thing suddenly made the non-GPL competition relevant and better. Now LLVM isn't a tragedy by any means, it's an excellent piece of software. But here we can see Stallman sabotaging his own mission, and resulting in alternatives to GCC being popularized, and written under licenses less favorable to FSF's mission.
- detourdog 3y agoI'm sure he is just playing the long game.