On Thu, 12 Dec 2019 19:45:01 -0500, Steve wrote in message <[email protected]>:
> On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 05:29:21 +0100 (CET) > freemedia via Dng <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The freedom to NOT run the software, to be free to avoid vendor > > lock-in through appropriate modularization/encapsulation and > > minimized dependencies; meaning any free software can be replaced > > with a user’s preferred alternatives (freedom 4). > > This is an excellent idea. The devil is in the details. > > How much entanglement, and with what, renders a software unremoveable? > > KDE is just as much of a black box of monolithic entanglement as > systemd, but getting rid of it is a simple matter of weening oneself > off its applications, and removing all its libraries and programs. > > Systemd would have been the same were it not for Redhat's extreme > expenditures on both lobbying and maintaining a crew of six to keep it > somewhat usable. Actually, systemd would be nothing but a geek > experimentation thing, something like hurd, if it weren't for Redhat > bucks. > > How does one specify by license how much should be spent on lobbying, > how much lobbying should go on, and how much corporate money should be > spent on development? What would that fifth clause look like? > > We all know, as a practical matter, that few living humans can > compile, configure and install systemd. Few living humans can modify > it in any meaningful way. And the fact that it's so useless > de-incentivises even geniuses from modifying it. So as a practical > matter, it isn't free software, but how the heck do you put that into > words when anybody can download its source? ..call it what it is, subversive software. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list [email protected] https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
