Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The GNU + FSF Relationship Remains Complicated But They Are Drafting A Framework

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The GNU + FSF Relationship Remains Complicated But They Are Drafting A Framework

    Phoronix: The GNU + FSF Relationship Remains Complicated But They Are Drafting A Framework

    Following last year's resignation of Richard Stallman from the Free Software Foundation under public pressure but remaining as head of the GNU Project for these tight-knit organizations, the two organizations have needed to figure out how to cooperate moving forward...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ship-2020-Soon

  • #2
    The FSF will be able to move forward only when DOCTOR Stallman (he's the only Ph.D I know of who goes out of his way to emphasize, on the least important of missives, the title of "DR." before his name) is completely out of the picture--gone. He managed to adroitly ingratiate himself back into the FSF-GNU mix after it was made imminently clear that he was, and is, excess baggage: a fifth wheel, who has made no meaningful contributions in a very long time.
    Richard M. Stallman is now, and has been, superfluous and irrelevant, and his clock has run down. It's past time for the FSF to make it abundantly clear to Stallman and the rest of the community that his 'services'--whatever Stallman, and Stallman alone, perceives them to be--are no longer needed, but that a breath of fresh air desperately is.

    The entire community needs to breathe a sigh of relief--of fresh air.

    Comment


    • #3
      Above all, RMS should have minimal input in any technical oversight committees. That way he doesn't hobble other software projects like he did with emacs and GCC with his outdated perception of the competition. Any time he's allowed direct input, he bans highly-desired improvements because of fears that they can assist companies in not contributing. Despite the fact that most have switched over to more user-friendly products with out copyleft licenses and still contribute. Worse is when people spend hours explaining reality to him, he randomly shuts down and accuses people of rushing him, only to request another unspecified time (usually 6-12 months) to sit on the issue before he comes back only to be wrong again. He can't debate without ad hominems and feeling attacked, and he won't listen to anything that doesn't fit his preconceptions.

      Let's also stop inviting him to be the spokesman for Free Software, please. He just does the same tired old performance that's mostly ranting and bigoted jokes. And he always wants people to host him in their homes, too. Which makes his problematic behavior even more of a risk. People who want RMS will ask for him by name. The rest of us just want to move on.

      Comment


      • #4
        How about a GPLv4 license that eliminates the anti-Tivoization clause? Don't tell people what they can and can't put in their own work.

        And for all that is sane, get rid of that outdated linking provision in LGPLv3. That renders work essentially unusable in the era of containers and app stores.

        Comment


        • #5
          I always suspected the removal of RMS could have been a targeted plan that had something to do with pushing the GPLv4 to hijack and sabotage all code under prior iterations.

          But then again, It's not like anyone in the world wants RMS to be the "Celebrity Star" and Image of Open Source. He's respectable for his technical contributions at the right time and place in the past but never before have I seen someone with such big Foot In Mouth disease and cross social boundaries into high-risk topics so brazenly.

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sJUDx7iEJw

          Comment


          • #6
            I hope RMS will continue to play an important role in free software. The FSF should stop acting like a little kid and accept that he will remain head of GNU. And rightfully so. After all he invented free software and founded the GNU project. He views on free software are still very relevant and important as ever, since more and more software sadly uses non-copyleft licenses.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by danmcgrew View Post
              made no meaningful contributions in a very long time.
              So what contributions have you made danmcgrew? I'm not a big fan of Stallman, but it always irks me when irrelevant nobodies try to minimize real contributions made by others. Stallman has left a big mark on the world, whether you like him or not.

              Originally posted by danmcgrew View Post
              The entire community needs to breathe a sigh of relief--of fresh air.
              I'm always suspicious of people trying to dictate to "the community" how they should feel or think. Especially when worded in a way that suggests the author is a slimy manipulator with a political agenda.
              Last edited by xinorom; 02-07-2020, 10:05 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by ElectricPrism View Post
                I always suspected the removal of RMS could have been a targeted plan that had something to do with pushing the GPLv4 to hijack and sabotage all code under prior iterations.
                Good thing most sensible people remove the "or any later version" clause.

                Comment


                • #9
                  People who try to hijack FSF and undermine Stallman should go.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by moilami View Post
                    People who try to hijack FSF and undermine Stallman should go.
                    the only person undermining Stallman is Stallman.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X