Ok, so Google, RedHat and Microsoft want to take over GNU, like they did with Linux, GitHub, Python and many other projects.
Joint Statement on the GNU Project
21–30 of 310 posts
Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project
#22If I believed for a second that any successor candidate to lead the GNU project gave as much of a fuck about software and personal freedom as Stallman did/does, I might support them. My confidence that this will transpire, however, is not high.
There are lots of us who care. We can preserve software freedom with the same stubborn, uncompromising attitude without having to also alienate the very people we wish to help.
Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project
#23fuck the GNU project. I no longer can take it seriously after the events that have occurred. Disgusting bunch of people.
That "disgusting bunch of people" wrote a ton of the underlying software that powers the internet. You might not like them, but show a little respect.
Some of them have also been brainwashed by their corporate overlords, who are pushing SJW to keep productive people in check.
Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project
#24Oh my god. " all computer users" with the implication that Stallman is not representing the ones who demand to go straight to lynch mob behavior without a shadow if due process as soon as the word "sexual" is mentioned? And therefore Stallman should be thrown out of the project that is his creation and life's work? That's got to be one of the most forced political readings ever of that point in the manifesto. Well, i…
I don't think that is what they mean by "all computer users".
You can not be a part of a lynch mob, and still take issue with Stallman's statements / behavior.
Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project
#25Wow, so what does this imply? Is this a coup d'état or just a _request_ for Stallman to cede part of his leadership to more people?
I should hope it's a coup. GNU will lose far more if all these people leave frustrated than if RMS is no longer its boss - even if RMS never harasses anyone again (which seems vanishingly unlikely).
Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project
#26Genuine question, what exactly do these maintainers want ? Stallman has already quit his leadership role/position, right ?! Is there something more that he or the GNU project needs to do ?
He quit the FSF and MIT. GNU is not the same thing as the FSF, despite their close ties. He has ascertained he still maintains a leadership role in GNU, and he has quite a contingency of devoted followers who think this is all a witch hunt against him.
It's not just Stallman. This is an attempted systematic ouster of old-school hackers (and new-school hackers with old-school values) from positions of leadership. Stallman is just the latest target and also one of the softest. They have also called for the removal of:
* Linus Torvalds (after he apologized and approved the adoption of their code of conduct)
* Ted Ts'o
* the entire FSF board
The problem is that while the old-school hackers were mainly left-liberal or libertarian, more and more open source developers these days come from the San Francisco web dev community and were immersed in the ideals and principles of the social-justice left, for whom "scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds" is an unstated truism. More struggle sessions and purges are likely to follow, if this contingent is allowed to gain ground, and I fear for a GNU project led by, instead of Stallman or someone who espouses Stallman's liberal ideals, a commissar who strictly polices the use of gender pronouns and scrutinizes every code commit and mailing list post for hidden signs of bourgeois consciousness.
These people do not even support free speech. What makes you think they will give a milligram of respect to free software?
Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project
#27Oh my god. " all computer users" with the implication that Stallman is not representing the ones who demand to go straight to lynch mob behavior without a shadow if due process as soon as the word "sexual" is mentioned? And therefore Stallman should be thrown out of the project that is his creation and life's work? That's got to be one of the most forced political readings ever of that point in the manifesto. Well, i…
I don't think that is what they mean by "all computer users". You can not be a part of a lynch mob, and still take issue with Stallman's statements / behavior.
But the lynch mob is still there and defends its cancel culture. You can see them all over Twitter. They are ruthless.
Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project
#28> We, the undersigned GNU maintainers and developers, … [18 signatures] Does anyone happen to of know what fraction of GNU maintainers those 18 names represent? Does this represent a majority of GNU maintainers or a small fraction?
Here's [1] the list of contributors to GNU. Note that it also includes past contributors. [1] https://www.gnu.org/people/
Not sure if that list is comprehensive. Neither Ludovic Courtes or John Wiegley are on it (and they are both signatories of the open letter).
Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project
#29I would suggest GNU people to not rush into decisions, the things are too heated at this moment, I am afraid we get a fracture of the project.
I am also having a bad feeling that Linus Torwalds is next, that a list of 20 years old emails is already prepared and some people are ready to tweat something that maybe happened long in the past that made them uncomfortable. Maybe that public apology Linus did this year was a defensive move.
Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project
#30Oh my god. " all computer users" with the implication that Stallman is not representing the ones who demand to go straight to lynch mob behavior without a shadow if due process as soon as the word "sexual" is mentioned? And therefore Stallman should be thrown out of the project that is his creation and life's work? That's got to be one of the most forced political readings ever of that point in the manifesto. Well, i…
The GNU project still allows you to use, read and modify all their work with no restrictions other than you must not place restrictions on your derived work.
How have they stopped you from doing so in their signed open letter?