[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: KDE vs Gnome
Hah!
Well, I made the mistake of talking to him at the Linux Expo. I asked him
to sign my bag http://www.silug.org~kara/pics/expo/bagback1.jpg and he
refused b/c the front said Linux Expo and not GNU/Linux Expo. He shook my
pen in my face claiming I would understand if I'd worked so hard on
something and wasn't being given credit for it. Well, DUH, if I wasn't
giving him any credit, why in the hell would I want him to sign my bag???
--Kara
On Sat, 17 Oct 1998, KoReE wrote:
>
> I've conversed with RMS on free software, too.....I wouldn't go as far as
> saying he's a lunatic, but he does seem a bit "edgy". I simply slipped
> and referred to my system as a Linux system (rather than a GNU/Linux
> system) and I received an 8 page email about my "grave mistake". And I
> wasn't even arguing with him about free software, I was trying to make
> sure I had *my* software correctly under the GPL :D That seems pretty
> nutty to moi :D
>
> Koree
>
> ______________________________________________
> Koree A. Smith | Co-Administrator, Ameth.org
> koree@Ameth.org | http://www.ameth.org/~koree/
> koree@koree.net | Linux Rules!
> NT < *IX | I Corinthians 2:1-5
>
>
> On 17 Oct 1998, Chris Tessone wrote:
>
> >
> > >>>>> "Steven" == Steven Pritchard <steve@silug.org> writes:
> >
> > And so it continues...
> >
> > Steven> I've met Stallman in person. He's a lunatic. That
> > Steven> doesn't make him evil, or even just bad, but it is a fact.
> >
> > Meeting Richard in person isn't the same as conversing with him about
> > free software and the GPL...
> >
> > Steven> That said, I have a lot of respect for what he has
> > Steven> accomplished, and I truly hope that one day all of the
> > Steven> software we use is Free, although not for the same reasons
> > Steven> that RMS does.
> >
> > What are your reasons?
> >
> > Steven> I'd disagree. What matters is that Linux has a reasonably
> > Steven> attractive, easy-to-use GUI for all the people out there
> > Steven> who think the GUI is the OS. The fact that the KDE people
> > Steven> did as much as they did in such a short time is a real
> > Steven> monument to Qt's ease of use.
> >
> > Well, I think our points of view are fundamentally different. I am
> > most interested in protecting the interests of free software and
> > seeing all software companies produce only free software in the sense
> > which Richard would also like to see. You appear to be primarily
> > concerned with having a nice, usable operating system. I don't think
> > these differences are irreconcilable, just different. I don't think
> > you're evil because you hold those views; I hope you don't think me
> > crazy for holding mine.
> >
> > Steven> I agree. I've attempted to discuss the issue with Arnt in
> > Steven> the past... I'd truly like to see all of these license
> > Steven> issues swept away.
> >
> > Me too.
> >
> > Steven> In the mean time, it's Troll Tech's code, so it is their
> > Steven> decision.
> >
> > Yup.
> >
> > Steven> Oh, come on... The whole argument that KDE isn't free
> > Steven> software is pretty bogus. The relevant portion of the GPL
> > Steven> that people are arguing about is this:
> >
> > Steven> The source code for a work means the preferred form of
> > Steven> the work for making modifications to it. For an
> > Steven> executable work, complete source code means all the source
> > Steven> code for all modules it contains, plus any associated
> > Steven> interface definition files, plus the scripts used to
> > Steven> control compilation and installation of the executable.
> > Steven> However, as a special exception, the source code
> > Steven> distributed need not include anything that is normally
> > Steven> distributed (in either source or binary form) with the
> > Steven> major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the
> > Steven> operating system on which the executable runs, unless that
> > Steven> component itself accompanies the executable.
> >
> > Steven> Note that last sentence. People like to argue that a
> > Steven> GPL'd Qt app isn't allowed because Qt isn't "normally
> > Steven> distributed ... with ... the operating system." Well,
> > Steven> Motif isn't distributed with most Linux distributions, but
> > Steven> it is with others, so does that mean that I'm violating
> > Steven> the GPL with a GPL'd app linked against Motif on Linux?
> > Steven> What if I then link it against Lesstif, then it is OK?
> > Steven> What if I try to run a SCO binary of a GPL'd program on
> > Steven> Linux, is that OK? Now, what if I run KDE on S.u.S.E. or
> > Steven> Caldera OpenLinux, which ship with Qt? That's OK, but it
> > Steven> isn't OK on Red Hat?
> >
> > It's not at all okay, as far as I know, none are okay. In fact, it's
> > not alright to link Motif to any GPL'd code. Yes, that's restrictive,
> > but it's all that's acceptable if one considers Stallman's
> > vision. Perhaps Stallman *is* crazy by your standards. I don't think
> > idealism is crazy at all.
> >
> > Steven> IANAL, but IMNSHO the vague language of the GPL in this
> > Steven> section makes the claim that KDE isn't free software
> > Steven> completely bogus.
> >
> > Yeah, it is vague, but I don't think that's on purpose. Perhaps the
> > wording should be changed...
> >
> > Steven> Of course, there's also always the fact that the person
> > Steven> who writes the software can violate the GPL all they want,
> > Steven> as long as they don't use any *other* GPL'd software, so
> > Steven> for most KDE apps, the GPL violation claims are truly
> > Steven> bogus.
> >
> > Huh? I think I was talking about users, not developers.
> >
> > Steven> Heh... Somebody arguing with _me_ about the stability of
> > Steven> free software. :-)
> > Steven> You are definitely preaching to the choir. (Actually,
> > Steven> more like the pastor. ;)
> >
> > Heh. I'm new to the list and I've yet to come to a meeting since I'm
> > only at home during the summer. Once I get to know you all better, I
> > won't act so silly. :-)
> >
> > Steven> Oh, yeah, I haven't mentioned already... My new record
> > Steven> for best uptime on one of my systems...
> > Steven> 11:32pm up 115 days, 15:52, 1 user, load average: 1.08,
> > Steven> 1.02, 1.01
> >
> > We had a pretty high uptime (I forget -- somewhere around 120 days,
> > then some NT jerk hit ^S and thought the machine had frozen, so he
> > hard-rebooted it :-D) on our X server. Ah, the beauty of a stable
> > operating system... :-)
> >
> > Steven> BTW, you are reading too much into what I said. I wasn't
> > Steven> trying to say that somehow Qt was more stable by being
> > Steven> non-free. (Actually, I never even used the word
> > Steven> "stable".) All I was trying to say is that Troll Tech is
> > Steven> concerned with keeping their customers happy, period. The
> > Steven> rest of the world probably has other concerns, so I
> > Steven> *understand* their license. I don't recall ever saying
> > Steven> that I completely agree with it. (I'm constantly arguing
> > Steven> the fact that the GPL not only allows freedom of choice,
> > Steven> but also tends to make software rather Darwinian... Only
> > Steven> truly good changes to GPL'd software will survive.)
> >
> > Heh. I suppose.
> >
> > Steven> It's real easy to tell what drives him insane. Go look at
> > Steven> what he bitches about most. :-)
> >
> > Well, it's not because he's "half-winning, half-losing". It's because
> > he'd like to see the situation rectified.
> >
> > Steven> RMS has always been a fanatic. That doesn't change the
> > Steven> fact that the GPL is a damn brilliant piece of work.
> > Steven> I've been working on a little essay I'm calling "Why the
> > Steven> GPL Works". I'll have to be sure to post a message about
> > Steven> it here when I finish it...
> > Steven> And trust me, I don't want RMS to go away. He's damn
> > Steven> handy to have around when somebody really does violate the
> > Steven> GPL. The rest of the time, I really wish he would sit
> > Steven> back, look at what he's already accomplished, and *think*
> > Steven> about what the best course of action is to further advance
> > Steven> his views. (Hint: It isn't to label commercial software
> > Steven> evil. That *will* backfire.)
> >
> > :-)
> >
> > Steven> Oh, BTW, I see you mention Perl in your .signature. You
> > Steven> do realize that RMS recently ranted about how evil
> > Steven> O'Reilly was, don't you? And Larry Wall has never
> > Steven> fundamentally agreed with RMS... That's why he does the
> > Steven> dual-license thing with Perl. (Oh, yeah, and Larry works
> > Steven> for O'Reilly too...)
> >
> > Actually, yes. I'm on the FSF Free Perl Documentation Project. Just
> > because Perl's documentation is evil doesn't mean I can't use it. It's
> > quite a nice language, as I'm sure you've heard/know.
> >
> > Steven> Please do some reading... Larry Wall and Linus Torvalds,
> > Steven> two people who deserve as much, if not more, respect as
> > Steven> RMS, *both* think RMS is too extreme. _That still doesn't
> > Steven> change the fact that the GPL is good._
> >
> > Nor does it change the fact that I agree with him. :-)
> >
> > Steven> Uh, XSuSE is based on XFree86, which is licensed under the
> > Steven> old X Consortium's damn-near-public-domain license,
> > Steven> meaning that they could *refuse* to ever distribute source
> > Steven> if they wanted to. (They could also start charging money
> > Steven> for it if they wanted to.)
> >
> > Yes, they could. I'm saying that the distinction between Qt and XSuSE
> > is that SuSE gives their code back to XFree86 for the next release (or
> > whenever the NDC is lifted for whatever card).
> >
> > Steven> Troll Tech lets you see, redistribute, and even modify
> > Steven> (with certain restrictions) their source code. How can
> > Steven> you even begin to compare the two?
> >
> > Okay, I missed that. So I don't read Richard's posts to Usenet
> > religiously... Oh well. :-)
> >
> > Steven> The biggest difference is that Troll Tech only charges you
> > Steven> if you want to do non-GPL'd software with Qt on X.
> > Steven> Consider it a tax on commercial software. IMNSHO *that*
> > Steven> is what Red Hat and others are so upset by.
> >
> > Hrm. Strange...
> >
> > Steven> So KDE is evil, huh? People using free software on a free
> > Steven> OS is bad _just because of one library_? So if/when
> > Steven> Harmony produces real code, will KDE still be evil?
> >
> > I didn't say it was evil. :-) Just non-free. If I said evil, I didn't
> > mean it that badly.
> >
> > Steven> I'm sorry, but both Troll Tech and the KDE hackers have
> > Steven> done a hell of a lot for free software. Granted, the
> > Steven> licensing situation is not ideal, but _we have a working
> > Steven> GUI for the lusers_. The rest can be ironed out later.
> >
> > I'm sure they have. I have great respect for them. Even more respect
> > than I do for the Microsoft people who, despite churning out a bad OS
> > still work hard on it.
> >
> > Steven> I honestly think that if people hadn't absolutely freaked
> > Steven> out with Troll Tech, the situation might be completely
> > Steven> different. As it is, I think they are sick of hearing
> > Steven> people bitch about licensing, so they ignore it. The
> > Steven> situation really called for some diplomacy, and the free
> > Steven> software zealots have *completely* blown it.
> >
> > Perhaps. It's certainly not good to see this in-fighting. We are,
> > after all, supposed to be working toward the same goal...
> >
> > Steven> I thought E was the WM of choice for Gnome...
> > Steven> FWIW, I've also become a bit fond of AfterStep. I also
> > Steven> installed WindowMaker, 9wm, and IceWM (and maybe others)
> > Steven> the other day, so I'll probably get around to trying them
> > Steven> sooner or later.
> >
> > I liked the old AfterStep, but the new one is...strange. Perhaps I'm
> > just old-fashioned. I'm pretty sure WM is now the window manager of
> > choice for GNOME. At any rate, grab the userfriendly and
> > DeathofSocrates themes from wm.themes.org. They're quite cool.
> >
> > Steven> One of these years I'll probably start hacking on PerlWM
> > Steven> so I can quit worrying about what window manager to run...
> > Steven> ;-) (No, I'm not joking. It exists.)
> >
> > PerlWM? Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!! I'm fond of Perl, but not *that* fond!
> > How? How is that at all possible?
> >
> > At any rate, let's not turn this into a three month, six thousand post
> > long flame war. Let's just agree that we have difference and go back
> > to our advocacy and other random stuff.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > --
> > Chris Tessone tessone@fnal.gov tessone@imsa.edu
> > PH/sendmail SNPC System Administration Perl/Shell
> > All you need is Perl, love. Perl is all you need.
> > http://www.imsa.edu/~tessone/
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo@silug.org with
> > "unsubscribe silug-discuss" in the body.
> >
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo@silug.org with
> "unsubscribe silug-discuss" in the body.
>
--
To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo@silug.org with
"unsubscribe silug-discuss" in the body.