🚀 go-pugleaf

mathew@mantis.co.uk (From A to B) writes:
>I have several goals in mind:

>1. Encourage Truly Free software.

What you seemed to describe in Email is nothing unlike Public Domain where no
restrictions exist on the origional code but any restriction can be made
of derivative works.  You seemed to question why I would even WANT to make sure
that derivative works were an issue, and why I would want to make 
sure they were kept free.

>2. Aim higher than the FSF; forget C and UNIX-emulation, go straight for
>   C++ and an object-oriented lightweight OS with a lightweight GUI (*not*
>   X.)  Give the IBM/Apple evil empire a run for their money :-)

  In a world where we are trying to communicate more and more with each
other, you wish to build your own incompatable system.  Not everyone shares
your belief that working WITH Unix and the like will not allow you to move
towards a better system faster than trying to start from scratch and
build support for something that 'may' be better, but doesn't have a
users base.  I'm an Amiga owner so I know about 'neat' O.S.'s that don't
get much support (Then again, It's a propriatary O.S. by a Company that
would have problems selling Heaters to Eskimo's, but it a great O.S. all
the same ;-)

>3. Persuade people that there aren't just two alternatives.  I suspect that
>   many people who use the GPL on their code do so not because they agree
>   with the FSF's objectives, but because it's there.  Or as was explained
>   in "Yes, Minister": "We must do something, this is something, therefore
>   we must do this." :-)

  You would probably be surprised at the number of people that agree with
the Goals of the FSF.  I myself don't write Unix Code, but I use the General
Public License because it says exactly what I want it to say.  Some may call
the 'Restrictions in order to keep things Free' an odd mix as bad as a
'War to end Wars', but it's a fact of life that people don't seem to want 
to be honest on their own.

>4. Tap funding which the FSF can't tap because of its restrictions and
>   conditions. 

   What kind of resources would your (IMHO misnamed) TFSF have access to 
that the FSF would not?  Resources that would likely be going towards their
own gains and actually USING you in the process.  If you start seeing
support by IBM, Apple, and companies of that ilk I hope you would not
expect that support to have a positive outcome.

>mathew

>-- 
>Hail Eris! / "Our whole economy's based on fear and death; how long can we get
>away with this?" --- Jello Biafra / Message for Kodak: Bring back Dan Bredy! /
>PGP RSA public key available on request / Desperately seeking Negativland's U2
>CD / Just another would-be Mac owner put off by Apple's monopolistic practices
--
  Opinions expressed in this message are my Own. I represent nobody else.
  Russell McOrmond   rwm@Atronx.OCUnix.On.Ca   {tigris,alzabo,...}!atronx!rwm 
  FidoNet 1:163/109  Net Support: (613) 230-2282  (V.32Bis) Amiga-Fido 1:1/109 
  Gateway for .Amiga.OCUnix.On.Ca    Current WELMAT 'keeper of sources'.