Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

lists.gnu.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 126 posts

Re: RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

#21

Post by elcaminocomplex »

sergiotapia wrote: post #16
wichert wrote: post #7

There is some awful stuff in that thread, like this gem [1]: After microsoft puchased Github, they encouraged "Codes of Conduct". So now 40k "opensource projects" hace CoC's. Obviously men won't be contributing to said projects, other than the people allready in them. [1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-system-discuss/2019-1...

Obviously it's hyperbole - but a lot of people are definitely put off by coc, myself included. It's a wretched, insidious text sneaked in by very bad actors into mainstream open source repositories.

The great thing about CoC is that they tend to be self-reinforcing, keeping out exactly the people who are bound to conduct themselves in ways that are inconsistent with the principles behind them.

Re: RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

#23

Post by boffinism »

sergiotapia wrote: post #16
wichert wrote: post #7

There is some awful stuff in that thread, like this gem [1]: After microsoft puchased Github, they encouraged "Codes of Conduct". So now 40k "opensource projects" hace CoC's. Obviously men won't be contributing to said projects, other than the people allready in them. [1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-system-discuss/2019-1...

Obviously it's hyperbole - but a lot of people are definitely put off by coc, myself included. It's a wretched, insidious text sneaked in by very bad actors into mainstream open source repositories.

Could you possibly elaborate? To me CoCs seem like they'd be at best a good thing and at worst harmless. What do you think is wretched and insidious about them?

Re: RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

#24

Post by TheCapeGreek »

robinwassen wrote: post #10
xwowsersx wrote: post #2

How does GitHub encourage sloppy licensing? How is GitHub bad for free software?

I think the reason is that GitHub lowers the barrier of entry to distribution of OSS. This makes more people distribute OSS, and most devs do probably not care as much about OSS licensing as RMS would like and therefore do "mistakes". RMS has a high horse stance, I think that easier access to OSS is better even though it might come with some side effects.

It's way easier for him to have a high horse about doing FOSS "correctly" when he was in an academic environment with different pressures for most of his career. There'd be a different tune sung if he were an average Joe with business requirements to fulfill.

Re: RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

#25

Post by em-bee »

blihp wrote: post #3

Is his comment based on outdated information? I just checked and github appears to recognize a few dozen ( https://help.github.com/en/github/creating-cloning-and-archi... ) license types including gpl2, gpl3 and lgpl

RMS argues against licensing under only a single version of the GPL

obviously he prefers "GPL2 or later" and "GPL3 or later"

does github offer that?

Re: RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

#27

Post by sergiotapia »

elcaminocomplex wrote: post #21
sergiotapia wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously it's hyperbole - but a lot of people are definitely put off by coc, myself included. It's a wretched, insidious text sneaked in by very bad actors into mainstream open source repositories.

The great thing about CoC is that they tend to be self-reinforcing, keeping out exactly the people who are bound to conduct themselves in ways that are inconsistent with the principles behind them.

before coc was snuck into these repos, was it just a shitshow of nasty people acting a fool in open source communities? I don't remember it that way.

Re: RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

#28

Post by de_watcher »

psv1 wrote: post #9

There is being direct and then there is speaking like an edgy teenager for entirety of your adult life. It's so difficult to take Stallman seriously when he makes these extreme generalisations.

I think that it's just because of the mailing list formatting.

It would look very reasonable on Twitter or Reddit. (of course he doesn't use that)

Re: RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

#29

Post by dabbernaught420 »

boffinism wrote: post #23
sergiotapia wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously it's hyperbole - but a lot of people are definitely put off by coc, myself included. It's a wretched, insidious text sneaked in by very bad actors into mainstream open source repositories.

Could you possibly elaborate? To me CoCs seem like they'd be at best a good thing and at worst harmless. What do you think is wretched and insidious about them?

At worst they can be used to restrict and exclude minority groups and to reinforce existing hierarchies (which are often unjustified).

Re: RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

#30

Post by ZiiS »

blihp wrote: post #3

Is his comment based on outdated information? I just checked and github appears to recognize a few dozen ( https://help.github.com/en/github/creating-cloning-and-archi... ) license types including gpl2, gpl3 and lgpl

He makes what I consider a valid point that a license should be compulsory or if missing more clearly highlighted.

He also makes a point that you cannot select "GPLv3 or latter" which is the licence GNU recommends.

Post reply on HN