Identi.ca Summary, 2011-06-19 through 2011-06-26
- The conversation
mentioned last week
libraries continued in a new thread this week. The thread was
- I pointed out, using OpenFOAM as an example that being against illegitimate use of otherwise good things doesn't mean you need to be universally against the thing.
- Finally, in the same thread, @jasonriedy mentioned the so-called Lisp LGPL, which I said was a seemed unnecessary now that we have LGPLv3.
- I noted that I wrote a blog post on OpenFOAM.
- I complained about the (lack of a) USA healthcare system.
- @fontana and I had a discussion about crossposting on identi.ca.
- I ack'ed that @fabsh had launched the oggcast, rantofabkuhn.
- The biggest news this week was that @kaz is now Executive Director of the GNOME Foundation, although the thread discussing it on identica was rather short. OTOH, @fontana asked if @kaz would be required to use GNOME 3.
- The thread
appearance on Linux Outlaws continued:
- @allisonrandal claimed to
have not said that
those who chose strong copyleft were just as happy with weak copyleft relicensing. I found the exact place where she said that in the LO 204 ogg file, wherein she says at 36:15 and 37:30:
Part of that reason is that when a developer develops code they want their code to be used. They may have a general philosophy that they want used. Most developers who contribute under a copyleft license &mdash they'd be happy with any copyleft license — AGPL, GPL, LGPL — they think — that's my “set”. …
You're using GPL and we're using LGPL, so we can't use your code. Hmmm, we can't do that!… this just doesn't fit the way developers think! We want our code to be used — and we're happy to have — if I said GPL, it's probably true that I'm happy to have it under LGPL as well. It's just too much work [without Harmony] to make that happen.
- @allisonrandal, @fontana and I debated the differences between strong and weak copyleft in a subthread.
- A subthread discussed who the leadership of Harmony is. I asked for a definitive place where I can find who are the decision-makers of Harmony and no one answered this, but @fontana made some speculations, @allisonrandal claims that Harmony has no leadership (I wondered but didn't dent: should people really be adopting important documents from a group with no leadership?). Also, @fabsh pointed out that he doubted that it was without leaders. @fontana pointed out that SFLC was not previously leader of Harmony; @allisonrandal says she thought they were and yet SFLC claims they weren't. I ended the subtread by asking again how Harmony governing works and got no response.
- In a subthread, @allisonrandal reiterated that FSF was wrong to change the terms of GPL with GPLv3 (which she'd previously stated on the LO interview. I still believe her position on this ironically contradicts the plans of Harmony, which seeks to empower companies to change licenses unilaterally. (Why should companies have a right to change a license, but FSF shouldn't?)
- I pointed out to
@allisonrandal that GPLv2 already specified inside the license plans
said in response that FSF updating GPL
wasn't helpful to Free Software developers. She further claimed that FSF's update to GPLv3 constituted
Manifest Destiny, which I disputed.
- The conversation on that sub-thread descended into a discussion of @allisonrandal's culturally relativistic attitude toward Free Software, wherein @allisonrandal admitted she's primarily a cultural relativist.
- Finally, there was subthread discussing how one can be pro-copyleft, believe that proprietary software is morally wrong, but also not believe permissive licensing is morally wrong. I would think such is obvious and well established by, for example, RMS' writings since 1984, but we nevertheless rehashed that old debate. In this subthread, I did point out that Harmony is biased against copyleft, and therefore is not merely an amoral proposition of all options, as @allisonrandal has claimed. (Oh, and this dent of mine in that thread was redented a bit.) I favorites and nearly redented @mlinksva's contribution to the subthread.
- @fontana linked to a Harmony list post wherein @allisonrandal attempts to make an 11th-hour effort to remove anti-strong-copyleft parts of Harmony.
- @allisonrandal claimed to have not said that
- There was a rather pointlessly lengthy thread about accents, mostly my Balmur accent (or adjusted version thereof). That discussion bled over onto another thread that started when I left @fontana a voicemail in a think Balmur accent.
doesn't like it that I call Hitler a “dude”, even though I
- I was a guest on FLOSS Weekly on Wednesday. @joncruz mentioned he enjoyed the show.
- I mentioned again to @mcgrof my copyleft-by-guilt theory of OpenBSD, which I'd previously mentioned publicly, which @chromatic found amusing.
- FSF intern @williamtheaker is working this summer on some historical GPLv3 data-gathering.
- @fontana started a thread on a Fedora list and on identi.ca about Gilligan's Island copyright of the Fedora website. This was previously discussed in two threads about a month ago, wherein I coined the phrase “Gilligan's Island copyright”. @fontana gave me credit on the Fedora thread for coining the phrase. I'm working on a more complete blog post on Gilligan's Island copyright.
- dneary's blog post made me think of an old boss.
- There was a discussion of my reasons for phoning @fontana.
- My beloved plastic $2 Pretty neat travel soap dish (tray / holder) that I got in 1991 is now cracked.
- @kraai is registered to donate bone marrow. I'm considering it.
- I'm continuing to work on some patches for GNU Bash.
- Some people apparently want an @bkuhn GPL enforcement action figure.