Quoting Amir Tal, from the post of Mon, 23 Dec: > we are preparing a list of questions that will be used in an interview > we are interested in conducting with RMS in his upcoming visit.
I see many questions here about Linux and not GNU. don't piss the guy off for no reason. RMS has made public his hate of the fact that Linus allowes closed-source modules in the kernel and is in general not giving atention to keeping the kernel patches pure GPL (for those out of the loop - the kernel is full of bits of code borrowed from BSD, public domain, no-license and other questionable sources that do not all assure it's really GPL-ly correct to release under the GPL at all.) I suggest fixing all the questions about "drivers for linux" to "drivers for free kernels". furthermore, I don't think IBM's laptop modems are any of his concern either. IBM has dropped support and pre-installation of Linux on workstations and laptop and are only selling it on server platforms. sad, but true. if they officially don't support it, you can't complain about their choices of hardware... > * Sometimes, in order to be able to finish modifying software for which > you have the source code, you need to be able to prove that your > modification has no unintended consequences. Therefore you need access > to a regression test suite. > In view of the above, should such a regression test suite be > considered as "source code" (meaning form in which is the easiest to > modify the software) as far as GPL is concerned? If not, why not? if they are released as part of the tarball of the product source, then yes. if they are just tools for development, then their license has nothing to do with the license of the code they help create. same as using notepad.exe to write GPL code :) > * about what's her name law offer to prevent government from buying non > opensource things what's her name is MK "Yofi" Nehama Ronen. her offer doesn't address open standards but open source (which is already a problem) and suggests it should be forced, which is against what the freedom of choice is all about, in the base of the Free/Open philosophy. I'd say he'll agree with me it's a bad idea and should be revised. Nehama Ronen is obviously riding a wave she knows nothing about to get PR, but it's done in a very unprofessional and misguided way. the bottom line is that she can be ignored or corrected, but not encouraged with the current suggestion. > > * About what he think should be done to push linux in Israel and solve > the Hebrew problem which stop so many people from using it. fix - enable more people use Free platforms. the answer from MY OWN POV, is education. promote the alternatives in the media and government through action in the Knesset and media publications. to that end there are very good solutions, like the obvious one - organize an Amuta of activists and start pushing it. no news here :) If I can guess what his personal reaction will be (not the official answer he might give), is "localize the bloody programs or have the people learn a LTR language!". being the geeks that we are (well, the unix veterans among us), we can make do with a naked GUI, but the public wants a GUI, so make KDE/Gnome do the Bidi thing and make Koffice/OO/GnomeOffice workable before you try to push it. as "simple" as that. talking to the media and the knesset about ideals but showing no product is empty. we're lucky the knesset realized that financing Bidi OO is a good investment, so it's a great start. > * What people can do to push linux into the education system. see above. have a Hebrew GUI and easy install (Linbrew?) with a working Office (OO?) and push Matakh to port to it. once you have the big educational software vendor hooked on the idea, and a good support infrastructure that knows how to set up school networks efficiaently (NFS root, diskless stations that boot into a software menu etc etc like schools do today with w2k/novell and matakh/edunetics/whatnot), and at prices saner than Xpert's. that's a startup, as we say. a Hebrew Linux platform that works like the terminal server project. it could be the killer app to turn the tables on the Israeli market... http://www.riverdale.k12.or.us/linux http://www.corozal.com/linux/ltsp.htm > well I have one last which is not Israel related but I think it's > important: > > * What plans they have to motivate hardware maker make drivers for linux, > and why aren't they cooperating on the subject with other nix based > OSs? again, my guess: we don't want their closed source drivers that are good only for a certain kernel. we want specs and possible an open source driver that can be adapted to any Free kernel (like Hurd, or BSD, which are both favored by RMS over Linux) > * How do you feel about IBM Israel selling its R30 laptops only with Lucent > AMR > modems, that according to linmodems.org "are definitely not supported"? they are free to sell it, you are free not to buy it. > * How do you feel about IBM selling *any* interfaceless, single-OS, hardware? > Could you do something about it? > > (Disclaimer: this is what my retail salesperson told me.) there is a more interesting question here - since IBM is doing those things, how comfortable are you feeling that they are inviting you to speak in their favor in this conferrence day? would you take the opportunity to give a piece of your mind to your hosts on their double standard towards Open Source? > please sent further questions to me. they will be examined and added > to the list. a final list will be posted back for your final approval > 2 days before the interview (no final date for that yet). I have a question that once bugged me, and the GPL is not particular about. the GPl quite implicitly allows an individual to take a GPLed tarball, make changes to the source and keep the changes and binary they produced to himself. you don't have to release your changes as source if you don't release them as binaries either. so far so good. ok, now what happens if the "entity" that developped the proprietary extension is a department in my company, and I get the source. am I allowed too re-release this? does my boss have legal power to forbid me from releasing it? how does the next version GPL (which is rumored to be in the works for a few years now) intend to take care of the questions of embeded OS and different license kernel and apps? since on systems as small and tight as the PalmOS and other examples the apps run practicly as part of the kernel, does the GPL tollerate it? I also like Nadav's question and wonder - what is the official stand of the FSF and RMS personally on fileswapping? programs and music that don't come with a copyright that prohibits copying are far from being the majority, but I have heard quotes th�t relate to RMS that say that "copying music for your friends should be a natural right", but until we get that right, how does he feel about it? does he avoid copywritten music like he avoids closed source, or does he share it with his friends against the (current) law? does he know any good Free bands, or does he stick to classical/early/baroque/folk music? -- The man who fell to Earth Ira Abramov http://ira.abramov.org/email/ This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
msg24090/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
