Re: Questions

[Aleksey Sanin <aleksey aleksey com>]

> Words are not the only way we speak about where we stand--actions
> speak louder than words.  It may seem like a trivial matter whether
> there are links to non-free programs on www.gnome.org, but that action
> is how the GNOME Project tells the community where it stands on this
> issue.  As you know, the stand it has taken is not one that upholds
> the principles of free software.  We cannot take for granted that
> GNOME developers fully support these principles--we have to talk about
> them more, not less.
>  

DISCLAMER: everything written below is *my* opinion. You may ignore
it or think about it but do not start "a holy war" in the mailing list, 
please.

I don't think that it is possible to *force* people to be "free". FSF 
(and GPL)
are trying to force people to make free software and, IMHO, this is wrong.
Not mention philosophical or psyhological reasons, this does not work
because if someone really wants to use GPL sources in a proprietary program
then s/he can find a way to do it. It's only software -- (almost) 
everything is
possible.

From my point of view, "free software" is *not* equal to GPLed code. 
IMHO, the
GPL license is much more restrictive than many "closed source" licenses 
I know.
I am making money by writing code. Many times I had situations when a choice
of program or library to use was done based on the license. And none of 
these
times GPLed code was the winner. Is it good for GPL code? I don't think so.
On the other hand, MIT type licenses (do whatever you want but don't 
complain
if something goes wrong) are usually more preferable than proprietary 
software
because you have access to source code and you can modify/use it as
you want. And almost in all cases, changes mae to MIT licensed code were
submitted back to the authors and by this improved quality of the 
original code.

GPL license makes my life harder and I don't like it. I would feel very 
bad if at one
day GPL license became a requirement for any GNOME project.  Personally, 
I don't
see any problem with using GNOME applications with *any* license. As the 
user,
I care about application, not the license. And if I could not find a 
GNOME application
that has XYZ function and there is a Windows application that does this, 
then I just use
Windows application. As I developer I vote for freedom. I don't like 
restricitions and
I would give my work back to open sources community if it is worth it 
and if I can do it.
But this is *my* choice and nothing can force me to do so.

Removing non-GPLed (or non-free) code from the GNOME Web page simply 
forces me
to use something other than GNIOME because it just complicates the 
search process.
IMHO, this is bad for GNOME project. And again, you could not *force* 
someone to be free.
It's a *personal* choice and the best you can do is to give an option 
and let people choose.
Isn't it a real freedom?


With best regards,
Aleksey Sanin