[GNUz] Slashdor discussion of php/mysql/gpl

[Jim Cheetham]

InfoHelp wrote:
> Jim Cheetham wrote:
>> promotion of 
>> GNU/Linux and SuSE simultaneously are potentially contradictory. 
>> 
> I don't see this at all. If recommending free software means 
> distributing it along with some less-than-free software, why shouldn't 
> we? The content is still there - in dilution, admittedly.

It was a parallel to the naming issues of "Linux" vs. "GNU/Linux". If 
recommending "Linux" means "forgetting to mention GNU's contribution", 
why shouldn't we? The GNU content is still there ...

> What GNU/FSF says to me, is that OSS has a foot in the M$/proprietary 
> camp already, & it's a slippery slope.

Now, that's already happening in many places. Witness the recent 
runblings about PHP and it's licenses, and note that PHP5 benefits from 
Zend's compiler, which is "free to non-comercial users". Also the 
Creative Commons licenses, where "no commercial use" is a very popular 
option. The Debian FSG refuses to discriminate against "fields of 
endeavour", which therefore explicitly allows commercial usage, but 
other groups are increasingly discriminating against commercial use. 
It's probably a form of sour-grapes - I didn't see a way to profit from 
this, so you mustn't either.

The back-stop answer from FSF is "we think the GPL is the best option to 
ensure enduring rights". This may turn out to be true.

> As in "free as defined by FSF", or "FSF-influence-free"?
> - very different meanings, opposites it seems.
> Do you mean that we should be GNU(extinguisher)z through this list?

No, of course not. I wear multiple contradictory hats, often for the 
sake of arguing a position. "free as defined by FSF" is the right thing 
for "GNUz" or "GLU" (are you trying to hijack CLUG? CGLU? :-)

On the opposing hand, if GNU-proponents can't argue against criticism 
here, they will not be able to do any better against 
closed-sw/MS-proponents.

> Why such efforts to vilify him? Is it to accelerate the privatisation of 
> OSS/Linux community portions?

As I have absolutely no interest in privatising OSS/Linux in any way, my 
  reactions to RMS must be based on other aspects.

-jim