Thread View: gnu.g++.help
2 messages
2 total messages
Started by Jim ADCOCK
Tue, 22 Jan 1991 19:18
Re: LGPL
Author: Jim ADCOCK
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 1991 19:18
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 1991 19:18
53 lines
3335 bytes
3335 bytes
In article <9101161825.AA09469@mole.ai.mit.edu| rms@AI.MIT.EDU (Richard Stallman) writes: |The purpose of the GNU project is not maximizing the use of GNU |software. It is promoting the freedom to share and change software as |much as we can. Having more users is better, all else being equal, |but not at the cost of forgetting what we are about. Perhaps Stallman needs to place a "clear statement" about what GNU is about in your licensing agreements, and in your statements about "freedom" so people will not be confused by the difference between your actual goals, and some of your more casual statements. |It seems that the GNU libraries will have enough use under the terms |now proposed to make them thrive. Even if that's only 25% as much as |they would otherwise be used, that is not a serious problem for the |GNU project. You contradict yourself in two paragraphs. You state that GNU is attempting to promote the freedom to share and change software -- but not maximize the use of that software. You state that the present licenses only allow perhaps 25% of the people to use GNU-restricted software, and do not consider that a serious problem. I disagree. I believe any software offering that deliberately prohibits the majority of programmers from using it is divisive, and against the good of the software community. Programmers -- please do not allow your software to be used for such divisive ends -- please do not allow your software to be distributed under the GNU licensing restrictions. |Pacifism is not part of the GNU philosophy, and software hoarding is |not a victimless crime. Being a wimp is not my idea of "high |mindedness". 'nuff said. This again, seems to be a statement that the ends justify the means. I disagree. People use the "ends justify the means" argument to try to justify whatever set of beliefs they believe in. The end result is that other human beings are injured. Gnu software itself engages in software hoarding -- justifying that behavior in terms of trying to force others to conform to their "political" ideals. I can tolerate such behavior if it isolated. But when Stallman refers to such behavior as "freedom" I must speak out and disagree. Attempts to coerce people do not represent freedom. "Freedom" is letting people decide for themselves. The Gnu software is in no way "free" but is as restrictive if not more restrictive that software available from other more traditional companies. Please do not be deceived by Stallman's attempts to label his actions "freedom." Please do not allow Stallman's licenses to be applied to your software -- doing so does not make your software more accessible to most software programmers, but rather prevents most software programmers from using your creations. [more than standard disclaimer]
Re: LGPL
Author: Kayvan Sylvan
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 1991 08:38
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 1991 08:38
64 lines
3532 bytes
3532 bytes
Jim ADCOCK writes: > In article <9101161825.AA09469@mole.ai.mit.edu| rms@AI.MIT.EDU (Richard Stallman) writes: > > [... too much stuff ...] > > Programmers -- please do not allow your software to be used for such > divisive ends -- please do not allow your software to be distributed > under the GNU licensing restrictions. > > [... And still more stuff ...] > > Please do not be deceived by Stallman's attempts to label his > actions "freedom." Please do not allow Stallman's licenses to be > applied to your software -- doing so does not make your software > more accessible to most software programmers, but rather prevents > most software programmers from using your creations. My apologies to the group for posting this to help-g++ rather than gnu.misc.discuss, but I couldn't help but reply to Jim's post. Jim's arguments do not really apply. The FSF licenses only restrict people's ability to restrict your access to the sources of the software you are using. You are free to do with the software what you like, as long as you don't restrict other people's freedom. Promoting freedom of software also means that you can't use free software inside your proprietary software. It is obvious that Jim from Microsoft is very invested (probably literally as well as figuratively) in the idea of restricting people's use of software for profit. He balks at the idea of not being able to use a piece of free software in a way that restricts his end-user's freedom. Too bad. To try to present that as a plea for freedom is true hypocrisy. An example that illustrates: I recently found a file system bug in the operating system I am using. Having found the cause (a buggy routine in a system library), I was able to effect a fix by replacing the buggy routine with one that worked from the net. *However*, I couldn't fix the binaries easily (because I didn't have the sources). I actually *did* end up patching the binaries (by disassembling them and findind out what to change), but it wasn't my idea of a fun time. The fact is that the software vendor had me at their mercy even though I was probably far more capable of fixing my problem in a timely fashion than they themselves were... They had, through their licensing, restricted my freedom to read and change the source. FSF software, on the other hand, is infinitely superior simply because you have the source. Making sources available to hundreds of bright intelligent software people all over the net to use/modify and send in patches insures that in a very short time you have sources that are ported to hundreds of different machines and that you have software that is *very high quality*. Enough said, ---Kayvan | Kayvan Sylvan Unix/C, GNU tools 879 Lewiston Drive 408-978-1407 | | Sylvan Associates GUIs, Databases San Jose, CA 95136 Think Globally | | Networking, X apple!satyr!kayvan Act Locally | | === Currently looking for contracts === Hire me now! Avoid the rush! === |
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads