On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 10:48:53AM -0800, Bob Scofield wrote: > On Friday 01 April 2005 07:32, Peter Jay Salzman wrote: > > Urgent breaking news: > > > > I can hardly believe it! CNN is reporting that Linus Torvalds is > > considering re-licensing Linux under a closed-source license. There's a > > huge argument on the Linux Kernel Mailing List right now over the move and > > many developers have been jumping ship. > > > > Linus claims the move to make Linux proprietary stems from differences in > > open source philosophy between the majority of Linux kernel hackers and > > GNU's upcoming version 3 of the General Public License. > > > > This is AWFUL news!!! > > > > I guess we might all have to start installing *BSD pretty soon! :-( > > > > I can't find anything about this on the CNN website. And judging from the > two > replies to this message I don't know if this is serious. But as the least > informed person on this list about software, I have some questions.
Not to worry; Pete's not serious. > 1) Free BSD is not going to be a satisfactory solution, right? Isn't > FreeBSD > a rather hierarchally based system? You wouldn't have the community based > involvement with Free BSD that you have in Linux, would you? And isn't Open > BSD run by a near madman? Well, let's not start a flame-war... Many would say that Mr. Stallman is a near madman, as well Although Linus is certainly fairly universally admired for his pragmatism, the GNU General Public License is Stallman's brainchild. > 2) What about this "forking" that people talk about? If Linus makes Linux > closed source, why can't the community continue to develop the existing > kernels? Short answer: yes; That's why such a rumor as Pete has announced is so completely laughable. The only thing that could change is that Mr. Torvalds would not be leading the main development branch; all existing code is under GPL, and even the Linus-endorsed fork would have to stay under GPL, as contributors would individually have to re-license their code otherwise, a *monumental* undertaking. Probably right out impossible. > 3) At this point in time, what right does Linus Torvalds have to close > source > Linux? Does he own the kernel? He owns the trademark on Linux (r), and the copyright on chunks (although certainly not all) of the source. > 4) What is HURD? Is it a potential alternative? HURD is the GNU attempt to write a kernel to go with the rest of the GNU toolset. Until recently, it was somewhat limited, although I understand that it does compile on at least one architecture and provide a kernel for a full OS there. It is structured completely differently from the Linux kernel, however. > 5) What is the *argument* on the Linux Kernel Mailing list about, really? > None of these people can be supporting this move, can they? There is no argument. That's the joke. Happy April Fool's Day! > Bob -- Marc Elliot Hall P.O. Box 435 Shingle Springs, CA 95682 SS tel: 530-672-8504 Mobile: 530-409-0372 www.hallmarc.net _______________________________________________ vox-tech mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
