Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 7th Feb 2006 23:54 UTC, submitted by sean batten
"Linus Torvalds doesn't want to change the Linux kernel's software license, and he said so again last week. For good measure this time, he threw in some inflammatory remarks. "I literally feel," wrote Torvalds, "that we do not, as software developers, have the moral right to enforce our rules on hardware manufacturers. We are not crusaders, trying to force people to bow to our superior God." Since the crusades were a foreign adventure responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands, that's not the most diplomatic response, and FSF counsel Eben Moglen refused to be drawn into retaliation when we contacted him for comment."
Permalink for comment 93717
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:
2006-01-07
If Stallman & friends feel so passionately about GPL v3, then they can release their own kernel (The Hurd) under it. In fact, I'm sure that they will do this. So if the "free world" thinks that GPL v3 is so important, they can migrate to The Hurd. Let's have some competition here, Linux GPL v2 vs. The Hurd GPL v3. The world will decide which is better. Info about The Hurd can be found here:
http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd.html
Personally, I wouldn't bet my lunch on The Hurd, but we'll see.
It would be nice if this GPL debate could be discussed in a civilized manner. Like most of the other posters here, I found the original article to be offensive, especially the remark about "crusaders." That was a very cheap shot, and tarnishes the author's argument to such an extent that even if he's right, people are going to dismiss him as a loonie.