Re: [Gnome-print] Re: GnomeFont state of affairs
- From: Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>
- To: Derek Simkowiak <dereks kd-dev com>
- Cc: Lauris Kaplinski <lauris kaplinski com>, Wolfgang Sourdeau <wolfgang ultim net>, Sean Thomas Middleditch <sean middleditch iname com>, Miguel de Icaza <miguel helixcode com>, gnome-devel-list gnome org, gnome-print helixcode com
- Subject: Re: [Gnome-print] Re: GnomeFont state of affairs
- Date: 17 Jun 2000 16:45:56 -0400
Derek Simkowiak <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> -> > > > That's a stupid goal. The goal should be to make free software
> -> > > > succeed. GNOME is a means to an end. Don't lose sight of that.
> Uh... just dropping into this thread...
> Since when is Gnome a pawn in the FSF's political agenda?
Um, did I say FSF? I didn't say FSF.
Still, you should know that GNOME is part of the GNU Project.
> been a proponent of Gnome because I want a desktop that doesn't suck.
> Speaking as an enduser, I could care less about whether or not Gnome
> advances the GPL or FSF.
Well, you have a right to make that your goal. Personally, if I was
only interested in technical issues I'd use MacOS X, BeOS, Berlin, or
even Windows. However I'm also interested in long-term viability,
usefulness to users, ability to hack on the code, and that sort of
thing - which means that licenses are important. I've gotten
interested in one too many cool proprietary platforms that disappeared
due to their proprietary nature. (NeXT, Amiga, anyone?)
> This is one thing that bugs me--it seems some people believe that
> using the GPL or LGPL automatically means you'd be willing to sacrifice
> the quality of your program for the benefit of "Free Software".
I see nothing about sacrificing quality. Presumably free software
results in superior quality.
] [Thread Prev