Re: Non-free software and GNOME

La plume légère, à Sat, Oct 20, 2001 at 02:03:10AM +0100, heure d'inspiration,
Mike Newman écrivait en ces mots:
> Sadly, we don't live in an easily isolated and compartmentalized world.
> As mentioned elsewhere recently, StarOffice is part of the migration
> path from Microsoft products to free products. In this sense, mentioning
> it in relation to GNOME is acceptible and laudible.

The fact we are not ready for adoption on the desktop is not a good
argument to promote the use of non-free software. People tend to keep
the environment they are living in, they don't want to waste time
at each upgrade. Let's keep out of the software market until we are
ready for it. Free software is not a matter of convenience, it is a
matter of freedom. If we prostitute this idea it will just weaken our
political goal.

> Mention them all, let people make a choice. I have views about free
> software you might not share, and vice versa. Expecting people to
> migrate is one thing, expecting them to swallow an entire belief system
> whole is an entirely other thing.

GNOME is part of the GNU project. Therefore it has to comply with certain
rules. If we follow your logic, GNOME should not even have started as
a GNU project.

> > And RMS's people skills are known to be a weakness...
> > it would be good if people are considerate of this and
> > work around it...
> I can't 100% agree with this - I admire RMS a great deal, but I make no
> allowances for intolerance and petulance.

This is a very teenage-like comment. If you tell me to respect certain rules
in order to go into your house I will have to comply. It would be unjust
from me to say "that is unfair, you are a dictator" and start making
it my way. The same thing applies to GNU projects.
Being a GNU project should not be a marketing argument.


Attachment: pgpRhucr7VyXX.pgp
Description: PGP signature

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]