Matthew C. Weigel writes:
On Fri, 28 Sep 2001, David Johnson wrote:
back about people having their heads in the clouds. The pundits on
both sides have stipulated a choice between morality and pragmatism.
I can only disagree with this. RMS has never said that free software
was
Karsten M. Self writes:
I'll be happy to share my own methods of organizing, reading, and
reviewing mail.
If your tools are so good, why haven't you said a word about the three
licenses supposedly under current discussion? To remind you, and
everyone else:
On Saturday 29 September 2001 16:39, Matthew C. Weigel wrote:
I can only disagree with this. RMS has never said that free software
was unpragmatic, or that a pragmatic person would necessarily choose
non-free software. The argument is that, pragmatic *or not*, free
software is the answer
On Sun, 30 Sep 2001, Russell Nelson wrote:
No, the argument is that proprietary software is immoral and unethical.
Sorry, I did not intend to make expansive arguments about the sum total of
motivations. I was specifically referring to the idea that software
licenses should not restrict us
On Sat, 29 Sep 2001, David Johnson wrote:
You're not seeing the forest through the trees. The invisible hand
is the forest.
No, I'm seeing hills, and you're calling it a forest.
The FSF and OSI distance themselves from one another politically, and
advocates of one over another disagree, but
Dixitur de Russell Nelson respondebo ad:
(...)
Good. Close. Better than my previous attempt. What do you think
of this:
2. Source Code
The license applies to source code. A compiled executable is
considered a derived work. Such an executable is only open source
if its
Dixitur de Rick Moen respondebo ad:
One architecture that may meet OSI's needs:
- At least two e-mail mailing lists (one of them possibly moderated),
- bidirectionally gated to a small newsgroup server (e.g., leafnode
2.0beta)
pine over 28.8 modem??? hehe...
but the mailing lists are o.k. for
I like David's suggestion. It supports both objectives mentioned by Larry
and does so with slight disruption to how the list works now. I suspect a
moderator on license-discuss could be extremely helpful in not only keeping
us on-topic, but in helping to ensure that the list provides as much
On Fri, 28 Sep 2001, David Johnson wrote:
back about people having their heads in the clouds. The pundits on
both sides have stipulated a choice between morality and pragmatism.
I can only disagree with this. RMS has never said that free software
was unpragmatic, or that a pragmatic person
Karsten M. Self wrote:
Another alternative would be to utilize a format that tends toward
self-organizing content: Wiki or Everything2. Neither, however, is a
good choice for issues in which an archive of discussion is desired, as
both tools are designed with a strong mind to refactoring
Another thought:
Many high-traffic lists (of which I'm not sure l-d really qualifies)
have a news summary that's posted periodically, usually weekly. This
usually covers highlights of recent discussion. Examples include
kernel-traffic and Debian Weekly News. This might be another
I just talked myself into it. That's a damn good idea.
Thanks ;-)
Note that this still boils down to a filtering mechanims. I *do* like
the (theoretical) effectiveness of collaborative filtering tools. A
news like feature could be implemented by skimming highly-rated items,
comments,
begin Thorsten Glaser quotation:
pine over 28.8 modem??? hehe...
but the mailing lists are o.k. for me, they can be fetched
using popclient quite well...
The nice thing about using a bidirectional netnews/e-mail setup is
that you can participate, equally well, from whichever side you
I'll note that a number of us probably never visited the site, in
particular as its significance wasn't clear at the time of the
announcement (and also probably speaking to the inherent problems of
web-based fora).
The IP is still active, though last I checked it had little other than a
14 matches
Mail list logo
