Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 13th Jul 2005 14:00 UTC, submitted by Timothy R. Butler
GNU, GPL, Open Source Tim Butler knew when he mentioned something negative about the GNU Project's General Public License (GPL), in his column on KDE last week, he would inevitably be accused of arguing the GPL was a bad license. What did not fit into that piece shall now be dealt with: is the GPL a bad license or is the issue he complained about something else?
Thread beginning with comment 3618
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Of course
by on Wed 13th Jul 2005 15:53 UTC in reply to "Of course"

Member since:

Obviously, nobody should pay attention to GNOME users

Nobody is saying that, don't be silly.
It is just funny, as Ali pointed out, that all negative comments about Qt's licensing model comes from the Gnome camp.
I mean, if Qt's license was REALLY a problem, the KDE guys would be the FIRST to be worried and to raise their voices. But they don't do it. Why? Because it's FAIR.
You want to use other people's work and contribute back something in the form of source code? That's GREAT, you can use Qt as long as you wish. You don't want to contribute anything and want to make money out of it? You have to pay. What's wrong with that?
Sorry if I sound obvious, but the whole point of free software is ..well.. to encourage development of free software.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Of course
by youknowmewell on Wed 13th Jul 2005 16:25 in reply to "RE: Of course"
youknowmewell Member since:
2005-07-08

Ali pointed something out that wasn't happening in this thread. Perhaps in the article (which I didn't read) there is, but not in the thread. He flamed a guy that was simply pointing out that his reaction was a bit knee-jerk and smelled of indirect flames at GNOME users. Let's look at the sequence here.

rm6990 replies:

For commercial applications it is beholden to Trolltech. You cannot write a proprietary application using QT without buying a license from Trolltech. This is not so with Gnome/GTK+. That is what he is talking about. Whether this is good or bad depends on the views of the user/developer.

He is simply pointing out the difference, nothing more. He is not giving his opinion.

Ali responds:

Right, if you want to write propritary closed source applications using QT then it's true. But then again if you look beyond the license only. Then you will see that at the end these companies are saving a lot of money too.

Ali agrees completely, except he says something at the end:

This should be your own interest. It could be your IT seat that could be reduced one day, because of your extreme views that helps no one.

Who's extreme views? He was obviously responding to rm6990, yet rm6990 didn't express his own point of view. Ali ASSUMED rm6990's position and based his argument on that. I pointed out a logical deficiency in Ali's arguments in d).

(My argument here is only relevent to show my position on the whole GPL vs LGPL deal and to show I wasn't being the big bad GNOME user.

a) and d) are lame arguments. a) is subjective and can start a whole flamewar in itself, and d) is just illogical given the whole reason behind having developers pay to make closed-source apps. It helps Trolltech, yes, but it would help the developers even more to not have to pay at all to make a closed-source app. That is to say, d) hinges on the betterment of companies so as to help the European economy, but doesn't it help more when a company doesn't have to pay for their tools, thereby not needing to pass the cost onto the customer? I'm not saying that it is illegitimate for Trolltech to ask for money, but I think your attempts at playing on patriotism are flawed.)

rm6990 responds:

Lol buddy, chill out. Maybe you should take a second to read the rest of my comment. Or maybe the one I was responding to also. I never commented on which one was better. I was merely answering the question of someone who didn't understand the licensing issues. Do you have schitzophrenia or something? You seem to be really paranoid?

rm6990 is correct, Ali assumed what rm6990's position was. Rm just pointed out that Ali was making a knee-jerk reaction.

Ali responds:

I now believe that it was too hard to expect getting an non-insulting comment from a GNOME user like you. Is it possible for you or others to argue normally ?

What the hell? Where did he get that from rm's reply? This sparks an argument between me and Ali.

I respond:

Mod this down. This is the beginning of a flamewar (thanks to Ali, again). Do you go around assuming that everybody who disagrees with you or how you react to a situation is an 'evil GNOME idiot'? The guy you flamed was on-the-money.

I point out how stupid it was for Ali to bring up the GNOME vs KDE war when there was none, and how he degrades GNOME users in general as being lower-class heathens (because one can't expect a 'normal' argument from us, because we are GNOME users).

Ali replies:

Micah (youknowmewell), is the only way for you to communicate nicely the way of namecalling others or defamate them in the public ? We all know you are a GNOME user and the author of ClearLooks-Indigo, no need to hide.

He continues the GNOME user bashing.

We have 18 comments so far, two known GNOME users

rm6990 and youknowmewell

We have some normal people who raise their voices and opinion and all we get from those two GNOMER's are inflamatory comments, insulting one (calling someone by name, calling them shizophreniac, paranoid, idiot) and so on.

And then the same two people want to argue about the benefits of GPL or LGPL [ykmw note: This is completely untrue, as shown by past comments.] because "someone didn't understood it" but then misbehave on their own because one of the elementary key elements of Open Source and said licenses also include free speach. But free speach don't mean to hand over a free ticket to some twits to act like morons publicly. Just because others (KDE people or people who don't have any issues with the QT licensing sheme) don't agree with them make them automatically shizophreniac, paranoid idiots.


Where did he get that?

Ok may GTK+ be free as free whatever, but who wants to spent time messing with a community that is build up on huge inflamatory insulting, where insulting and offensive behavior is the only way for them to publically demonstrate their weakness and inability to communicate nicely and friendly. Now keep your FREE LGPL'ed whatever and stuck it up where the sun never shines. It won't help any company or user much if all they receive is bad inflamatory crap.

These things luckely don't exist on the KDE frontier. The people are mainly friendly, helpful and calm persons. You can have nice and friendly conversations with them, they help one, you help them with bugreports and you feel home there. All the license issues by side, but are you willing to work with people like youknowmewell or rm6990 ? There are plenty of them out there. Their way of behavior and the way of some others from the same camp speaks for the entire project they are feeling committed too, one is the same as the other and within the past years I have only found a handful of 'normal' people there.


Kind of ironic.

So you see, although there may be thousands of bad comments coming from GNOME users about QT, there were none here and his comments were unjustified.

Reply Parent Score: 3