To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Vi vs Emacs was really BSD vs GNU
Gnome vs KDE was about whether it was OK to use a closed toolkit, then gradually Qt became more and more open until finally its license is the same as GTK - yet even now there is a CLA to contribute to Qt.
Mandrake vs Red Hat was really Gnome vs KDE again.
Sendmail vs Postfix was actually a technical thing, sendmail is simply insecure, and postfix tried to fix that - hence the name.
These all made sense in the Open Source space, and again the stuff Ubuntu are doing is argued for similar reasons. No one wants to sign a CLA because it means a particular entity controls the future of the code. It isn't good enough that the community can fork for most, having many contributors with equal rights means no one really controls anything.
As George Carlin said, "it isn't a right if it can be taken away" CLA allows the rights to be taken away.




Member since:
2011-09-10
No way! There always been competition in Linux world. Vim and Emacs, Gnome and KDE, Mandrake and Red Hat, Sendmail and Postfix. They're duplicating efforts all along and that's a good thing.