Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 23rd Jul 2009 22:53 UTC, submitted by Remy Chi Jian Suen
Editorial So, Microsoft submits 20000 lines of code to the Linux kernel, all licensed under the GPL. Microsoft, who considers Linux a great threat, and once called the GPL a "cancer". Opinions on this one are flying all around us, but what does Linus Torvalds, Linux' benevolent dictator, think about all this?
Thread beginning with comment 375014
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: I agree...
by Vanders on Fri 24th Jul 2009 09:42 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: I agree..."
Vanders
Member since:
2005-07-06

Because FOSS is an ideology that not everyone subscribes to?


"Ideology"? Wow, that gives it fat too much credit. It's a development methodology. That's all.

Because it threatens existing businesses that have invested vast amounts of money into products, only to see FOSS equivalents springing up and undercutting them?


There's a word for being undercut in the market. I'll have to go look it up, hang on. Oh yeah, that's it. It's "business".

Getting undercut by the competition is what happens. Weather the competition is Open Source is not is utterly irrelevant. If your product is any good, it'll be able to compete.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[8]: I agree...
by Kalessin on Fri 24th Jul 2009 17:11 in reply to "RE[7]: I agree..."
Kalessin Member since:
2007-01-18

"Because FOSS is an ideology that not everyone subscribes to?


"Ideology"? Wow, that gives it fat too much credit. It's a development methodology. That's all.
"

Free Software is an ideology. Open Source is a development methodology. FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) is referring to software created as a result of the Open Source development methodology by people who may or may not subscribe to the Free Software ideology.

Now, many non-Free Software, Open Source developers (such as Linus) have the ideology that Open Source is the best - if not only - methodology which should be used to create software, but that's an ideology about Open Source rather than Open Source itself actually being an ideology.

In any case, talking about ideology and FOSS isn't entirely incorrect because the Free Software side of things is indeed an ideology, but it confuses things because Open Source is, as you say, a development methodology.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: I agree...
by Vanders on Fri 24th Jul 2009 19:50 in reply to "RE[8]: I agree..."
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

Free Software is an ideology.


As a Free Software developer I'll respectfully disagree. I do not release my code under the GPL for idealogical reasons.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[9]: I agree...
by Delgarde on Sat 25th Jul 2009 12:17 in reply to "RE[8]: I agree..."
Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

Free Software is an ideology. Open Source is a development methodology. FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) is referring to software created as a result of the Open Source development methodology by people who may or may not subscribe to the Free Software ideology.


Good distinction. Yes, Free Software is very much an ideology - that's practically the entire point of Richard Stallman's years of campaigning, the idea that code *should* be free. Free Software is based on the idea that it's practically immoral for a user not to have the ability to modify the software they use. That's why the GPL has that 'viral' behavior - to absolutely discourage free code from being used by those who don't share that ideology.

And don't get me wrong - I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. But Free Software *is* ideology driven, and it's only a subset of open-source development. Personally, I'm mostly in it for practical reasons - because if someone has already done 90% of the work on something, it's a lot easier to contribute that last 10% than to do the entire 100% yourself...

Reply Parent Score: 2