KDBUS & Systemd Now Yields A Working System

[zester]

Anyways I am celebrating tonight because we finely got all of the GPL/LGPL out of
userspace. The whole system only contains BSD/MIT/Boost/Zlib licensed software except for the
Linux kernel.

Everything is sooo clean, and every library and tool is well maintained, by its original maintainers. No more long waits to get
simple bugs fixed, no licensing conflicts.

FreeBSD and NetBSD Dev's have been sooooo helpful.

[zester]

Our version of coreutils is called HydraCore it contains all the commands found on any BSD and those found on a GNU system. But!!! Not only can you build
each utility individually, you can also pick and choose what command you want to compile into a single executable like busybox. And ever program is BSD
Licensed. Rob Landley is also of course awesome.

You can build a crazy small distro.

[RahulSundaram]

Our version of coreutils is called HydraCore it contains all the commands found on any BSD and those found on a GNU system. But!!! Not only can you build
each utility individually, you can also pick and choose what command you want to compile into a single executable like busybox. And ever program is BSD
Licensed. Rob Landley is also of course awesome.

You can build a crazy small distro.

Perhaps but for others to build anything requires the source code to be published under an appropriate license. Can you provide a link to the source code of "HydraCore" or any of the other projects mentioned by you here? That would be a good first step.

[zester]

Perhaps but for others to build anything requires the source code to be published under an appropriate license. Can you provide a link to the source code of "HydraCore" or any of the other projects mentioned by you here? That would be a good first step.

Not this time no, every-time I release projects in the middle of development, I get bombarded with questions. It will be released when
Nvidia and the Ati Binary Drivers + Wayland work together in some form.

Besides I am going to make dam sure, that I and everyone involved get fulls credit and some jack ass doesn't
clame he/she had the idea first.

[mrugiero]

We in-vision an ecosystem where "Open Source" and "Proprietary" software work's together, in an effort to build the best possible platform for current and future generation's of users.

I don't get it. You said your ethics stop you from restricting use of something that should have no owners, in another thread. I understand you use a liberal license because of that. But according to that ethic, your vision is pretty much "evil", as you actually expect to be an accomplice of people who directly restrict access to the same resource. One thing is not banning them from using something you shouldn't have control over, and a different one is to plan to create synergy with them and outright help them, when they explicitly want to restrict use of it. That's not consistent.

[zester]

I don't get it. You said your ethics stop you from restricting use of something that should have no owners, in another thread. I understand you use a liberal license because of that. But according to that ethic, your vision is pretty much "evil", as you actually expect to be an accomplice of people who directly restrict access to the same resource. One thing is not banning them from using something you shouldn't have control over, and a different one is to plan to create synergy with them and outright help them, when they explicitly want to restrict use of it. That's not consistent.

Nope you understood me wrong, my ethics forbid me from restricting access to anyone, that includes oss and propitiatory. How does what you do make
me the bad guy? I heald up my end as I am not restricting you, them or anyone. Thats true freedom not the GPL as it restricts rights to the code. You and I cant own code, as its a work of the collective consonance. And you said that was valid.

[mrugiero]

Nope you understood me wrong, my ethics forbid me from restricting access to anyone, that includes oss and propitiatory. How does what you do make
me the bad guy? I heald up my end as I am not restricting you, them or anyone. Thats true freedom not the GPL as it restricts rights to the code. You and I cant own code, as its a work of the collective consonance. And you said that was valid.

Of course. That's why I say using a liberal license is valid according to your ethics. What I don't get is how your vision blends in with proprietary software developers. I get that it's their call to release the software or not, but as you consider you shouldn't restrict use, but associating with them as your vision seems to imply is what sounds weird to me. To put it in an overly exaggerated way, imagine you say "killing is bad", but then you start a mob and as the godfather you send OTHER people to kill for you. Oh, you are not killing, but it's kind of the same thing. When you say your vision is proprietary and free software to make an ecosystem, you expect some people to restrict access to the very same thing your ethics say you should not restrict access, and usually one envisions the best possible outcome, not the expected reality. I believe that, according to those values, your vision should be that everyone chooses the BSD license (lacking an even more liberal one), and just not be pissed off by the fact in the real world some people will choose to go proprietary.

[zester]

Of course. That's why I say using a liberal license is valid according to your ethics. What I don't get is how your vision blends in with proprietary software developers. I get that it's their call to release the software or not, but as you consider you shouldn't restrict use, but associating with them as your vision seems to imply is what sounds weird to me. To put it in an overly exaggerated way, imagine you say "killing is bad", but then you start a mob and as the godfather you send OTHER people to kill for you. Oh, you are not killing, but it's kind of the same thing. When you say your vision is proprietary and free software to make an ecosystem, you expect some people to restrict access to the very same thing your ethics say you should not restrict access, and usually one envisions the best possible outcome, not the expected reality. I believe that, according to those values, your vision should be that everyone chooses the BSD license (lacking an even more liberal one), and just not be pissed off by the fact in the real world some people will choose to go proprietary.

My view is more Freedom of Religion then Arms Dealer.

If I preached to the masses about sin and you go off and start murdering whores because there sinners, that doesn't make me responsible because your a fucking psychopath.

[mrugiero]

My view is more Freedom of Religion then Arms Dealer.

If I preached to the masses about sin and you go off and start murdering whores because there sinners, that doesn't make me responsible because your a fucking psychopath.

Now it is clearer. It's kind of like what I told you in the other thread, as you don't try to apply your own ethics to other people. Anyway, my point was more about assuming one calls his own vision an optimistic one. In an optimistic view, you usually put people agreeing with your ethics, even though you are not willing to enforce it if they don't. At least that's my idea of "vision", maybe that's where we disagree.

[zester]

In an optimistic view, you usually put people agreeing with your ethics, even though you are not willing to enforce it if they don't. At least that's my idea of "vision", maybe that's where we disagree.

I am being partial to those who agree with my ethics, Its an opensource project.