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

Who controls glibc?

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 528 posts

Re: Who controls glibc?

#41

Post by sneak »

zeth___ wrote: post #34

Fork if you don't like it. That's the whole point of free software. Edit: I find it disturbing that so many people want to erase hacker culture from the internet. Consensus is a Bay Area idea, one that came quite late to the world of computers, and one that many of us disagree with.

Forking out any vestigal rms authority would benefit everyone.

They’re bikeshedding over whether or not to include a comment on a controversial topic. It is not relevant to the functioning of the library and is just a distraction. Rip it out and ban rms for perpetuating such idiotic drama.

Re: Who controls glibc?

#42

Post by briandear »

Maybe I just don’t have the sophistication to “get” it, but what the heck is this all about. At first glance this just seems like something childish. Someone educate me.

Re: Who controls glibc?

#44

Post by GW150914 »

slededit wrote: post #21

I don't really get this "joke" but man do I hate the trend of removing any personality from code. Programming used to be FUN and a way to express yourself. Easter eggs exemplified this. Now its cold and business only.

Everyone who decided they’d rather have a giant paycheck than have fun made it happen. This site is full of people who make and made that choice, who chase VC money, and consequently have little right to complain about how corporate their working lives are.

Re: Who controls glibc?

#45

Post by caio1982 »

At the same time I think the change was overzealousness and that still it's a fair debate to have and why not remove it if they eventually reach consensus (as per their own official definition of consensus [linked somewhere in those e-mails])? It's only to show glibc still have governance problems after the Ulrich Drepper era, it has nothing to do with abort() and its possible meanings in a manual.

Re: Who controls glibc?

#47

Post by NeoBasilisk »

briandear wrote: post #42

Maybe I just don’t have the sophistication to “get” it, but what the heck is this all about. At first glance this just seems like something childish. Someone educate me.

I believe it is in reference to the US government's (or possibly some states') policies concerning abortions.

Re: Who controls glibc?

#48

Post by zeth___ »

MBCook wrote: post #36
zeth___ wrote: post #34

Fork if you don't like it. That's the whole point of free software. Edit: I find it disturbing that so many people want to erase hacker culture from the internet. Consensus is a Bay Area idea, one that came quite late to the world of computers, and one that many of us disagree with.

That’s the really odd thing in this situation. The maintainers all seem to want to remove it, and the project governance says the maintainers are supposed to decide based on the quorum. RMS just over ruled that. Because it was his joke and he felt like it. Which seems like it goes against the whole “community“ thing.

If you read the waiver you have to sign before contributing anything to the fsf you surrender all your copyrights to them. This is so they can keep moving software into newer GPL versions.

The maintainers are just mechanics working on someone else's car and have as much say in choosing the interior decor.

The beauty of the system is that if they get sick of that state of affairs they get an identical copy of the car for free and can then do whatever they want to it.

Re: Who controls glibc?

#49

Post by drb91 »

thsowers wrote: post #39

While RMS has undoubtedly contributed much to the FOSS community, he seems to undermine some of his core points with trivial matters. For example, his piece "Reasons not to use Facebook"[0] contains some great points, but I find them undermined by the unnecessary usage of the word "useds" Similarly, this seems like an extremely trival case to "exercise my authority over Glibc very rarely" as he puts it. [0]: https://…

I'm not sure I follow. What's wrong with his term?

Either people get what he's writing, and the term is irrelevant, or they don't get what he's writing, in which case I doubt that it would be because they were so distracted by a single word they couldn't focus on anything he's writing at all.

So you just don't like the term. This is fine! But you've failed to make any point.

Re: Who controls glibc?

#50

Post by zeth___ »

lsh wrote: post #40
zeth___ wrote: post #34

Fork if you don't like it. That's the whole point of free software. Edit: I find it disturbing that so many people want to erase hacker culture from the internet. Consensus is a Bay Area idea, one that came quite late to the world of computers, and one that many of us disagree with.

No, that's just another option when it comes to free software. Why not make an effort to cohere rather than disperse? Stronger together and all that. RMS is pulling the authority card, which is always a dodgy thing to do, and people want an egalitarian project rather than an authoritarian one. Both sides need to learn when to pick a fight and when to let something pass.

Because GNU has always worked that way and given us some of the best software ever written.
Post reply on HN