____/ Mark Kent on Monday 16 July 2007 09:37 : \____
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> ____/ [H]omer on Sunday 15 July 2007 00:17 : \____
>>
>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Kier spake thusly:
>>>> On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 14:05:45 -0700, Tim Smith wrote:
>>>>> In article <i8lnm4-tp9.ln1@xxxxxxxxxx>, "[H]omer" <spam@xxxxxxx>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> .---- | This is a call for developers who are interested in
>>>>>> | pushing the limits of content and code freedom - including
>>>>>> | firmware, content, and authoring infrastructure, to join the
>>>>>> | team and help identify places where we must separate out pieces
>>>>>> | that don't belong in Gobuntu from the standard Ubuntu builds.
>>>>>> `----
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They should start by eliminating Mono, which they still ship:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/gobuntu/daily/current/source/gutsy-src-1.list
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Along with it's tainted dependants, such as Novell's Beagle.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, who would expect to find free software that follows
>>>>> international standards, like Mono, in a free operating system?
>>>>> What were they thinking?
>>>
>>> It's not Free, it's patent encumbered and subject to a dubious RAND clause.
>>
>> When you use Mono, watch your back.
>>
>> http://boycottnovell.com/category/mono/
>>
>> Microsoft could not only turn the table (or throw a chair) on you
>> by 'extending', but its lawyers could also go Rambo III on your arse.
>> Groklaw has already analysed this issue and it's up on Grokdoc.
>
> You can be sure that they will. Microsoft need to be seen as the old
> male lion, chased away from the pride by younger males, but still highly
> dangerous.
>
> As things get worse for Microsoft, they will do anything in order to
> raise revenue. Only the naive would not see this as inevitable.
>
>>
>>>> I don't get the exteme hostility to Mono, at all. For instance, Linux
>>>> Format mag is certainly not antagonistic to it, since they've
>>>> published several good articles about programming with Mono.
>>>>
>>>> There's room for totally Free software distros like gNewSense, and I
>>>> have nothing whatever against them, I think it's fine that the devs
>>>> want to do that, and can do that. But why start crapping on Ubuntu?
>>>> Not everyone is a Free software purist. Some need/want more
>>>> flexibility.
>>>
>>> This isn't Ubuntu, it's Gobuntu - with the specific goal of being an
>>> untainted version of Ubuntu. Presumably there *are* some people who
>>> wanted this, otherwise they wouldn't have created this fork in the first
>>> place.
>>
>> I think they just don't have enough manpower to go after and eliminate the
>> unwanted bits. gNewSense was the work of only a couple of people. Mark
>> invited more people to discuss and develop it. that was last week.
>>
>
> I don't really understand why they're doing this, though - Debian does
> exactly this already, and covers a wider range of platforms, too.
> Surely it would be better to contribute into the Debian project?
I am pretty certain some Debian delivers quite a few binary (or not truly Free)
components. I recently read something from a Freetype developer who sort of
confirmed this. If Debian was as Free as gNewSense, it would not have worked
on many standard PCs.
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | Windows is 'intuitive': go to 'Start' to finish
session
http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
10:00:01 up 29 days, 15:28, 7 users, load average: 0.92, 1.00, 1.47
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine
|
|
