2006/10/10, Mrugesh Karnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
If you have such issues, don't let people use
the tools. But again, that goes against freedom, doesn't it?
What I hate about you FSF people is that you try and steal credit.
I don't agee. What FSF is asking is the credit it rightly deserves.
You
just said the same thing again... Use GNU in the name? WHY? Make up a
name that highlights freedom, _very very clearly_.
GNU represents users freedom.
Oh and mind you, you say GNU/Linux not GNU & Linux. The only place where
I've seen that second term used is on those stickers:
"GNU + Linux, the dynamic duo".
I think that's fair. Clearly states that Linux is a separate project.
GNU/Linux does not do that.
May be you misunderstood. GNU/Linux is clear. May be GNU+Linux is clearer.
But, why not work in favor of FSF's interest, if FSF's
> agenda is to protect your and my freedom. When we are requesting
> people to adopt GPLv3, it is not to snatch anything from from you,
> but to prevent it from getting snatched.
Highlight "request". I agree with Linus. If the kernel developers think
that GPL 3 is no good for the kernel, so be it. Let it be under GPL 2.
Why create an issue? Highlight "request".
GPL protect users Freedom. So when we have threats (like software patents,
DRM ...) to users freedom we need to defend it. GPLv3 is trying to cover
some of the shortcomings of GPL v2. It has be around for 15 years and a lot
of things has changed and new threats have come. So we need to equip
ourselves for new conditions.
Cheers
Praveen
--
"Value your freedom, or you will lose it, teaches history.
`Don't bother us with politics', respond those who don't want to learn."
-- Richard Stallman
Me scribbles at http://www.pravi.co.nr
--
http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
