Notices tagged with freesoftware, page 91
-
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 -
lxoliva (lxoliva)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 17:23:00 EDT
lxoliva
@fontana so Red Hat missed the opportunity to set up a level playing field like e.g. Linux's, furthering proprietary forks instead :-( -
lxoliva (lxoliva)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 17:21:23 EDT
lxoliva
@fontana I don't get that argument. ALv2 doesn't take away any doubt that the software will remain free in the future; quite opposite -
lxoliva (lxoliva)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 17:20:06 EDT
lxoliva
@fontana I was a contractor with “Cygnus, a Red Hat company” for a couple of years, but employment came later, after Red Hat arrived in .br -
fontana (fontana)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 16:48:35 EDT
fontana
@lxoliva I see email addresses for you on archaic web pages that say lxoliva at #cygnus dot com. Was that post-acquisition? -
lxoliva (lxoliva)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 16:38:59 EDT
lxoliva
@cwebber maybe ALGPL would be a more suitable acronym, although it might be mistaken for some Arabic license ;-) -
robmyers (robmyers)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 15:31:51 EDT
robmyers
@fontana if not, the solution is for the rightsholder to not be a company... -
fontana (fontana)'s status on Tuesday, 01-May-2012 15:08:48 EDT
fontana
@lxoliva the desire is for this code to become the standard. Only other FLOSS PaaS project I know of is #CloudFoundry; uses ALv2 as well
All Hacker Poesy content and data are available under the