Open-source code advocates are calling for cooler heads to prevail in the often-heated debate about many of the revised terms in the first discussion draft of the GNU General Public License Version 3 that was released in early January. While there are many opinions and questions about how the draft should be revised, there is one issue on which many in the free and open-source community agree: it is just too early in the process for people to take a definitive position on whether they can accepts its provisions.
As long as the license is a work in progress, our opinions about it should also be works in progess…
… quite obviously — given the controversy — Stallman et al should have solicited more feedback from the open source community before trying to ram GPL3 down peoples’ throats. This could actually set back the cause of open source quite a bit…
Couldn’t agree less.
Controversy == free media coverage == more people thinking ‘WTF are these FOSSiles on about, anyway?’.
The word of the day is ‘freedom’. Spread the word.
Uh, I don’t really remember him as having rammed GPL3 down anybody’s throats. It’s a work in progress, the end. If it was finished, it might be a totally different ball of wax, but it’s not – and everybody _should_ know that – but apparently doesn’t.
I wish people would quit getting their undies in a knot worrying about a draft. Discussion is one thing, but all of this sensationalism is getting to be a bit much. I also wish the other folks that are attempting to use a draft of the GPL as ammunition to fire at people while proclaiming the death of open source would disappear off the face of the planet.
These kinds of comments disgust me, THEY do more to “injure” the open source cause than anything, because people associate ignorant misguided comments such as the above with the open source movement. Consider that for a moment, and try to think about that before making another non-true, and almost comically bad post throwing mud.
Edited 2006-02-10 19:59
Uh, I don’t really remember him as having rammed GPL3 down anybody’s throats.
Do a little research. Here’s a good place to start:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1913288,00.asp
In this interview, Stallman says the following…
eWeek: So, is the process now in the hands of the community?
Stallman: No. I will still be making decisions. The committees are going to take all the comments and boil them down to issues. Then they will start addressing the issues and looking at the various options. They will also try and decide how to deal with these issues, but ultimately I will be making those decisions. And, of course, if the community has found a good solution, they make that job easy.
In other words, the whole concept of “public comment” is a sham, a farce, intended to placate those simple-minded vassals who mistakenly think that their voice actually matters to King Stallman. He most certainly IS ramming this license down peoples’ throats. Much like how U.S.S.R used to conduct “elections” every year — with amazing resilience by the Communist Party seen year after year…
Stallmans comments sound just like every leader of free software development.
Many developers create and contribute code to the linux kernel, but Linus still gets final say in what goes in to the kernel, and he should because it’s his project. If developers don’t like it then they can move to another project or fork. Linus doesn’t force linux on them.
The GNU GPL is Stallman’s project. It’s just a licencse, if you don’t like it then you are free to not use it, or modify it to suit your needs.
THIS IS WHAT PEOPLE CALL FREEDOM! which is the whole point of free software.
– Jesse McNelis
I don’t see anything mentioned in your quote referring to GPL3. Guess what, GPL3 doesn’t even exist yet.
Nowhere do you “back” your claims he is ramming GPL3 down any person’s throat. I am free to do as I please. So is anyone else. He never states otherwise. My business writes BSD based software as part of operations. Please explain to me how Stallman (a man I dislike greatly, for personal reasons) is shoving GPL3 down my throat.
Comparing the USSR and Stallman? I will attempt to issue a non-inflamitory response. I will tell you as having lived in a communist country, and having have dealt with (above mentioned) government, Stallman is nothing like the USSR (or communist government, I am assuming that is what you meant) was. Stallman doesn’t restrict me to 1 chicken, 1 set of chicken bones, 2 loafs of bread, and a dozen eggs per month. He never has, he never will. My ex-communist government (under control of the USSR government) did. Stallman is shoving nothing down my throat, I do as I please. You can do the same. Save your sensationalism for those who are too ignorant to realize the fundamental flaws in your argument, and your lack of any knowledge of what you are speaking about.
Cheers.
Edited 2006-02-11 09:28
I don’t see anything mentioned in your quote referring to GPL3. Guess what, GPL3 doesn’t even exist yet.
Here’s a clue, Einstein. The article that was referenced is called “Stallman Speaks on the Future of GPL 3.0”. So maybe you can rethink what Stallman is talking about…
Nowhere do you “back” your claims he is ramming GPL3 down any person’s throat.
Let’s make this simple for you: Stallman is writing GPL3. Yeah, he’s waving his hands and pretending that the community has input — but it’s subject entirely to his approval. So, yeah, he is shoving it down people’s throats. There are plenty of people who don’t want the provisions that he’s added (ie. DRM, etc) but that’s too damned bad. Stallman will get his way because he’s got final approval of the license. Anybody who wants to differ from the license is automatically creating confusion. The real power of GPL is standardization. Once that goes, you’re left with a confusing tower of Babel.
Stallman is shoving nothing down my throat, I do as I please.
Well, you certainly won’t be taking GPL3, changing the language, and retagging it “GPL3”. Stallman will crucify you.
Here’s the way I see it.
1. Richard and Eben worked long and hard together, behind closed doors to come up with something solid enough to present to the community for discussion.
2. They have presented it and asked for discussion, and have allocated a whole year for that discussion to take place.
3. Richard has the final call on what the license says.
4. The first draft is actually remarkably restrained in some areas. e.g. patent retaliation and use of GPL software to power remote services like web-apps. Not to mention concessions to enhance compatibility with other Free licenses.
5. There are a couple of hot-spot topics like DRM.
6. People who have licensed their software as “GPLv2 or higher” might be in a position to have GPL “rammed down their throats”. They will simply have to trust that Richard remains even handed.
7. If Richard is not even handed, new code can still be licensed GPLv2, period. And if he is not even handed, much new code will be. Not that I see that as being likely.
All in all, I think I would have to say that the sky is not falling.
The GPL3 license is not final, but is still in its formative stages, and that is precisely what he *is* doing right now — he is asking people for feedback.
That is why people are making comments.
Are you retarded? The current GPLv3 is a draft version. The whole point of releasing it was to have “solicited more feedback from the open source community before trying to ram GPL3 down peoples’ throats”. There is no final GPLv3 at the moment, and changes are being made based on feedback.
How the hell are they supposed to get feedback if they fail to give the community a starting point (which is what the current draft is)?
I’m sorry, I don’t normally say things like calling people retarded, but that was seriously a dumb comment on your part. How you got modded up is beyond me.