Notices tagged with fsf, page 45
-
Evan Prodromou (evan)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 20:50:58 EDT 
Evan Prodromou
Nope. The only way to do that is to put value into the copyleft fork. -
lxoliva (lxoliva)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 20:29:14 EDT 
lxoliva
@fontana because they misunderstand the license, or because they don't want to respect users' freedoms? -
fontana (fontana)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 20:21:11 EDT 
fontana
@lxoliva I suspect target contributor base finds #AGPL repugnant. -
lxoliva (lxoliva)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 19:06:52 EDT
lxoliva
@fontana if it was sure, it would know others would join in regardless of conditions to keep derivatives OSS -
lxoliva (lxoliva)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 19:05:58 EDT
lxoliva
@fontana sounds like Red Hat is uncertain about the OSS proposition that OSS is more beneficial to all involved parties -
Evan Prodromou (evan)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 19:00:36 EDT
Evan Prodromou
It seems relatively straightforward to make a GPLv3 or AGPLv3 fork of OpenShift. #gnushift #freeshift -
lxoliva (lxoliva)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 18:50:49 EDT
lxoliva
@bkuhn by preemptive defeat I mean giving up core values to get popularity for something that won't be aligned with the core values -
lxoliva (lxoliva)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 18:49:11 EDT
lxoliva
@bkuhn well, given the existence of AL contender, it could have been tested now, but Red Hat chose the pyrrhic preemptive defeat instead -
bkuhn (bkuhn)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 18:27:14 EDT 
bkuhn
@lxoliva, Extremely insightful. I think you're right. Sad thing is, it's one of those hypotheses that can't be tested w/out alt. universes. -
lxoliva (lxoliva)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 18:16:47 EDT
lxoliva
“if you copyleft, we won't contribute” often means “we won't contribute anyway, but with copyleft we can't abuse so it's no use” -
lxoliva (lxoliva)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 18:07:45 EDT
lxoliva
@fontana my feeling is that Red Hat chose preemptive defeat, rather than leadership on the path that has served it so well -
robmyers (robmyers)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 18:07:32 EDT 
robmyers
@robmyers oice -
lxoliva (lxoliva)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 18:04:10 EDT
lxoliva
@fontana AL just enables some of the improvements to never see the light of day. rather than encouraging, it discourages contributions -
robmyers (robmyers)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 18:03:27 EDT
robmyers
@fontana How do you mean? #interested -
lxoliva (lxoliva)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 18:02:59 EDT
lxoliva
@fontana if OpenShift gets any external contributions under AL, how could AGPL have averted that? -
fontana (fontana)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 17:58:35 EDT
fontana
@lxoliva I think it may be true right now. If Red Hat had chosen AGPL, little chance of there being non-RHT contributors. -
fontana (fontana)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 17:57:02 EDT
fontana
@lxoliva only viable choice to stop proprietary forks is #AGPL, but AGPL has suffered from commercial pwnage problem. -
lxoliva (lxoliva)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 17:29:21 EDT
lxoliva
@fontana aoliva at cygnus.* shortly became at redhat.*, yeah. it all started in feb 2000, few months after the merge -
lxoliva (lxoliva)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 17:25:00 EDT
lxoliva
@fontana how can Red Hat, after years of Linux experience, not see that “AL is better to bring .com contributors” is FUD by abusers? -
fontana (fontana)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 17:23:42 EDT
fontana
@lxoliva ah, I did not know that
All Hacker Poesy content and data are available under the