Jan Gloser <jan.renra.glo...@gmail.com> writes: > 1) I think some valid questions have been raised to which I have not > seen ANY satisfactory answer that no doubt a person who truly > understands the subject (unlike me) should be able to give. (though I > might have missed some)
Everything that's been raised in this thread apart from Oracle's alleged SMF patent trolling was already raised and discussed in the giant Technical Committee bug of doom. The reason why you're not seeing a lot of constructive engagement with those points here is that most of us are exhausted with this conversation and tired of repeating ourselves. People have a natural tendency to claim that they could be persuaded if someone would just engage in the discussion that *they* want to have, as opposed to the hundreds of discussions we've previously had, but the reality is that just about everyone made up their mind a long time ago and are unlikely to be persuaded by the perfectly-phrased counter-argument. At this point, for better or worse, we're in the "we're going to do this and see how it goes" phase of the discussion. The Oracle patent trolling is new, at least to me, but Debian also has a project-wide policy, already applied in many similar cases, of ignoring things like that in the absence of considerably more evidence of legal risk than we have to date. (And that legal risk, if it exists, would not be discussed in public, due to the pathologies of patent law in at least the United States and possibly elsewhere.) -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87y4zs3fyc....@windlord.stanford.edu