3 ms·

I don't thinks words are being put into anyone's mouth, what was said was quite clear: > while Git is made by anti-GNU people who do not believe in free softwa

by efuquen 13y ago

I don't thinks words are being put into anyone's mouth, what was said was quite clear: > while Git is made by anti-GNU people who do not believe in free software As stated in above comments I would find it hard to believe Linus would not say that GNU is a valuable asset or software built strictly promoting GNU/FSF principles is bad ... but he's been labeled as anti-GNU for writing software that has a more permissible license. I don't see how this could be an even more "with us or against us" attitude. You could argue the above statement is an overgeneralization of what the OP said to the whole movement. But there are plenty of thing that prominent individuals, who work on GNU and represent the FSF, have said that would support this attitude.

belorn 13y ago
> but he's been labeled as anti-GNU for writing software that has a more permissible license No. he has been labeled as anti-gnu because of torvalds own statement like: "So I'm pretty well-known for not exactly being a huge fan of the FSF and Richard Stallman" "Linux from the very beginning was not about the FSF ideals." I would not directly call it anti-gnu, but neither is he friendly. He can also not be directly called truly neutral given the number of negative comments he has made about projects and work.
- Karunamon 13y ago
  I don't like the FSF or Stallman's ideals myself (I find them dogmatic, unrealistic, and probably a bunch of other negative adjectives) but I cannot deny they are a net positive influence on the world. I'm also annoyed because that very dogmatism weakens their very positive message.
  - belorn 13y ago
    I have a hard time seeing how the world would work if people did not strive to achieve their goals. Take a for-profit company. Their goal is to make money. If I ask them to compromise on this and stop earning money, they get very dogmatic about it and completely refuse. If I ask a politician to start promoting a competitor, he will also dogmatic refuse. I can not even get him to compromise. I offer him nice bribe money, and he should accept it and step down. What I am trying to say is that dogma and compromises are not the black and white, good and evil. Dogma is required to make the world work, and compromises are only good when it doesn't interfere too much with it.

by efuquen 13y ago

belorn 13y ago

> but he's been labeled as anti-GNU for writing software that has a more permissible license No. he has been labeled as anti-gnu because of torvalds own statement like: "So I'm pretty well-known for not exactly being a huge fan of the FSF and Richard Stallman" "Linux from the very beginning was not about the FSF ideals." I would not directly call it anti-gnu, but neither is he friendly. He can also not be directly called truly neutral given the number of negative comments he has made about projects and work.

Karunamon 13y ago
I don't like the FSF or Stallman's ideals myself (I find them dogmatic, unrealistic, and probably a bunch of other negative adjectives) but I cannot deny they are a net positive influence on the world. I'm also annoyed because that very dogmatism weakens their very positive message.
- belorn 13y ago
  I have a hard time seeing how the world would work if people did not strive to achieve their goals. Take a for-profit company. Their goal is to make money. If I ask them to compromise on this and stop earning money, they get very dogmatic about it and completely refuse. If I ask a politician to start promoting a competitor, he will also dogmatic refuse. I can not even get him to compromise. I offer him nice bribe money, and he should accept it and step down. What I am trying to say is that dogma and compromises are not the black and white, good and evil. Dogma is required to make the world work, and compromises are only good when it doesn't interfere too much with it.