Re: Status report for Building Debian/Mingw packages for DIA

[Cyrille Chepelov <cyrille chepelov org>]

Le Mon, Sep 09, 2002, à 02:04:07AM -0700, James Michael DuPont a écrit:

> I have reported and dealt with over 4 GPL violations with them up till
> now, and it is not practice to inform the violator immediately. 
>
> Even Stallman asked me specifically on one occasion to NOT tell the
> people that they were under investigation.

[snip]

Well, what RMS thinks is pretty irrelevant. I'm talking about politeness,
you are replying with what one random guy told you to do in a different
occasion. 

The kind of behaviour RMS allegedly told you to pursue is called in French 
"délation". And to my mind, it immediately invokes collective memory about 
a period of the 20th century I'm very happy I never lived in. Now, by 
Godwin's law, the thread is finished.

That RMS has (allegedly) little social skills, or that he advocates silent
action against megacorps with deliberate intent of violating is one thing.
Behaving that way against people who don't want to weaken the very license
they share code with is just stupid, when a couple polite private exchanges
would have resolved the issue swiftly and without frustration.

> I wrote personally to hans and tor about the situation if you are
> interested, about that email that I have forwarded to you. Also
> remember that YOU personally are not involved here.

Yes I am. You are making a lot of noise and bullying on a project I care(d)
for. Besides, I hold bits of copyright on the project. And I don't feel Hans
has ever violated the code for which I hold copyright.

I feel very strongly about this whole issue. Let me show you another
scenario:

        * you come, point out friendly that the GPL requirement for source
is not completely fulfilled
        * we don't understand, you quote chapter and verse without
threatening us.
        * we come to an agreement, the issue is solved.
        
Wouldn't the world have been a better place?

You definitely have not understood what I think the problem is with you:
it's with repeated offer for peace followed by repeated blows in our face.
This I can't tolerate. You claim you have re-read the whole disaster, very
good, you claim you didn't see anything wrong from your side, well, that's
your opinion.

Now, you seem to not have understood the invitation I made to you in the
last paragraph of my previous post. You claim you have broad support from
users (you certainly have proofs of that, I don't ask them to you). If this
is really true, then I invite you to fork the project. 

Yes, do it now. Start a new list, find a CVS area, and work there. It's damn
free software, you are free to fork it if you feel it's the best way
forward!

If people are interested in following you, they will. It's pointless we
continue to argue endlessy; let the people vote with their feet.

This happened with EMACS, and led to the XEmacs/EMACS rift. It's not that
painful, is it?

(It also happened with EGCS/GCC. It is possible that one day I have to eat
my hat and follow that road as well. So be it!)

Remember that Godwin's law has been invoked. 

        -- Cyrille

--