Re: Questions

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, 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

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

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