🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <009437b8.d2ba1e20.3685@v6550c.nrl.navy.mil> youngdale@V6550C.NRL.NAVY.MIL (Eric Youngdale) writes:

> If FSF does all of the hard work of getting
>something to work and supporting it, why should a vendor be able to "modify" it
>and sell it as proprietary (i.e. distribute only binaries).  If someone wants
>to distribute only the binaries to a program, then fine, let them write the
>whole thing from scratch.  No one is forcing them to use GNU software.

Hear, Hear!  

I'm simply amazed that this argument even exists.  Richard Stallman and
the GNU project have already revolutionized computing.  Although "free
software" is the main impetus for this project, GCC may have saved many
"orphan computers" from oblivion.  We have been *given* wonderful
products to use.  Even the development of commercial, non-free software
can be done using GNU products.  What you can't do is sell a GNU
product!

Heavens; you cannot typically modify and sell a Sun product, a DEC
product, an Encore product, an ATT product,...either.

Even if one disagrees with Dr Stallman's vision, there is no logical
basis for arguing that FSF "should not" operate as it does.

Lighten up folks.  Mr Youngdale is right:  If you don't like the rules,
don't play  the game!


-- 
_Brinton Cooper		BRL - Where "Research" is our Middle Name.