On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 23:26:54 +0000
Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> __/ [ ed ] on Saturday 18 November 2006 21:32 \__
>
> > On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 16:18:19 -0500
> > Geico Caveman <spam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/06/11/18/1838229.shtml
> >>
> >> Time to reject any patches or code coming from Novell or its
> >employees > ?
> >>
> >> This deal sounds more and more like SCO with improvements. SCO
> >failed > because they could never point to a piece of code and prove
> >it was > stolen.
> >>
> >> I think that Microsoft is making up for that mistake by using their
> >> new great friends at Novell to do the planting for them. Months
> >later, > when the offending code has made its way into most distros,
> >Microsoft > will swing in with the just cause.
> >>
> >> I said precisely this a few days ago in my response to John "Novell
> >> uber alles" Bailo.
> >>
> >> Its time to cut Novell off before they succeed in planting any
> >bombs > in Linux kernel / app code.
> >
> > but as i think roy said recently, the moment they do that it's SCO
> > stage 1, prove that there is stolen code. how can they do this? and
> > if they saiy "Noel Power" submitted code, then it's svn rollback
> > time and remove that diff, svn export and repackage (after a clean
> > build of course).
> >
> > if they cannot suggest what code is stolen then there is no case.
> >
> > and besides all this. people are going to move away from novel's
> > linux in droves, hopefully to something better like debian. where
> > politics is more important, the chances of this stuff going
> > unnoticed is less likely to make it into the stable branch.
> >
> > besides all that, i prefer the OO.org macro language.
>
> Having just read a certain article, I think I now see where it all
> began...
>
> http://applications.linux.com/article.pl?sid=06/11/08/1726205&from=rss
>
> See the comments. Someone must have read it and sent it to Slashdot,
> but I haven't checked this carefully. Like you say, people will be
> going in droves where 'politics' comes before money (if money is
> involved at all). I really hope that a fork which is backed by many
> active developers comes out of SUSE soon. I want to stay with SUSE but
> say goodbye to Novell. I feel bad for SUSE developers whom I know...
> they did nothing wrong, but that management is completely out of
> touch.
i'm sorry for your loss. but the world turned away from the rpm format
when rh went commercial-er. i dont want to say whats better or worse,
but looking at the community right now, slack/debian seem the better
choices. even ubuntu has a risk of being bought out as they have less of
a political front. they just want to get the latest version out the door
ASAP, without as much regard to stability or politically portable
packages as the deb crew.
> With the revisions on the site, I suspect it's irreversible and the
> money irrevocable. Notice how quickly Microsoft took action (the day
> after). It was all carefully planned (orahestrated even). Probably one
> of those brainstorm sessions behind closed doors, people exchanging
> memos like the Haloween Documents. Can we get a copy of that script
> that describes Ballmer's plot?
>
> I can only wish for reversal, I guess...
>
> http://enterprise.linux.com/article.pl?sid=06/11/17/180224&from=rss
>
> Samba asks Novell to scuttle Microsoft deal
>
> Novell will never live again. It's like an old dog that you can no
> longer carry in your journey of survival. They chose to ignore Noorda
> and they will end in the same way.
they could live if they divorce. the novel board could disembark the
partnership at anytime if they wish... what does ms have to say that
they cannot do that? they have a written agreement, but so? would that
really stop novell from doing exactly what they want and take any route
they want.
--
Regards, Ed :: http://www.linuxwarez.co.uk
just another python person
Vin Diesel's tears can burn through steel.
|
|
