On Feb 2, 2007, at 20:07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I like to compare the FSF to the abolishionists and the suffragettes;
the latter two are certainly irrelevant now but the FSF is not far
behind. I'm not surprised that the FSF wants Sun's backing; but I
don't think they bring to the party what you think they bring to the
party.
The FSF exists, is the holder of the copyright to a huge body of
code, is able to rightly claim support from a vast number of people
(especially outside North America), and is certainly not irrelevant -
or if it is, so are we. I assert as a consequence that they remain a
large influential movement in the world of software. As the saying
goes, "some of my best friends are FSF members."
They are indeed motivated strongly by an ideological outlook that
associates a precise and controversial meaning to "freedom" - one I
know inflames quite a few people on this list. While some here have
associated them with "Linux" that outlook is untrue. They speak of
the "GNU Operating System" and I have been approached by many, many
FSF members and supporters around the world who would welcome the
chance to have an alternative kernel for that OS, licensed in a way
they felt ethically able to use, so that they could cut the cord that
binds them to Linux.
Folk here have laughed at their outlook and some have ridiculed their
ethics, but the truth is a passion for "Free as in freedom" drives
them and has resulted in a global movement that is able to change
government policy in South America and elsewhere, drive OLPC and make
corporations rethink their strategies. So please don't write them off
this way.
So what do they bring to the party? They bring a passionate group of
innovators, geeks, radicals, advocates, hobbyists - enthusiasts -
who, if the contacts I have personally had are representative, are
eagerly waiting to divert their energy to the promotion, use and
development of OpenSolaris as the kernel to the GNU Operating System.
That cannot be and is not the only factor, but it's one quite a lot
of us find hard to admit. But in my experience it's true.
Plenty of people have asked what a GPLv3 dual license would bring to
the OpenSolaris project. It would bring a mix of positives and
negatives, just as OpenSolaris now is a mix of positives and
negatives. The challenge for us as a community is to hear and measure
all the positives and negatives fairly and reach something
approaching consensus. Perhaps via the new OGB when it gets elected
(and how /is/ that voting software coming on?)
I've read voices in these threads who regard talking about something
they don't agree with as a waste of time, but I'm very pleased Sun
decided to ask for the views of the OpenSolaris community before
acting. I'm (just about) following the discussion and it's often
enlightening - thank-you to the ~ 13 people who have spoken up. I
would love to hear some more views.
S.
PS: For the record, I have not made up my mind - I can see some of
those positives and negatives and am still weighing them.
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
