From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JEWZA-00026I-EO for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 21:09:56 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E20D1E096F; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 21:09:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mu-out-0910.google.com (mu-out-0910.google.com [209.85.134.191]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AA6AE0948 for ; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 21:09:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mu-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id i10so1512739mue.5 for ; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:09:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; bh=WEf75sZ0m60EoLkzX6Qa6uwBozkYsxZwjWIgSsBbfk4=; b=Ke+xDCOwofPcNt4Q2HR/PY76rE8AmEUxPR9Qo+HrQpv/jz9PVLvQzbbaPH5LBw2A6jU1ZwANJ+l1H+hOjzc0dpE3iz0erVyzDZPHGU4ouQOTPvd1GCPggOsipOHkW7eAK2b5OG/VivV9UC0wPDr3tcYGE3yzj4mUXozXEz82yWs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; b=WkBpFOirCCkdKwsDUqNnlYgYKjX/5U9MzGUA3VJvYyRxY7zO5NrsJBfqx7KI7yFo4gGz/I9j2VagU1pe7btnAdPJX01bgi01MK+oXCC1D9XcPLi01ln/u36VDRAdaFKXfyNWifckejIXadQkBNxSeHKyT6RqJ+ITraWuQIC2x0U= Received: by 10.78.122.16 with SMTP id u16mr8142420huc.21.1200344955545; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:09:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?10.0.0.3? ( [41.243.229.42]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c5sm1498228nfi.2.2008.01.14.13.09.12 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:09:14 -0800 (PST) From: Alan McKinnon To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Daniel Robbins' come back ? Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 23:03:49 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <1200129071.4788842fc5816@imp.free.fr> <478BAA2B.5060800@gnoo.eu> In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200801142303.49325.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> X-Archives-Salt: 3ef62d3d-6cb3-4cd9-ad64-a9fd2228da0c X-Archives-Hash: 9d076e38d81a45698a80496015c76f6e On Monday 14 January 2008, James wrote: > If it dies lots of folks > can pick up the code, rename it and start a fork that can be GPL or > commercial, IMHO. =A0 The GPL get's in the way, IMHO. Handing it over > to Daniel with ~100% non publish control is a recipe for the serfs > =A0and the majority of the serfs to get the privilege of remaining on > massa's farm, IMHO. > > > Why else do you think the real discussions are going on behind > closed doors? Even if Daniel does wrest control of Gentoo from the non-existant=20 =46oundation and change the license on Gentoo's copyright works, very=20 little actually changes. He can't prohibit anyone from using what they already have under GPL,=20 and each one of us already has a complete copy of portage on our=20 machines. If he does turn Gentoo into some evil empire, the rest of us=20 always have the choice to say "So long, it was nice knowing you", fork=20 and create a new distro. A new gentoo might be able to tell us that we=20 can't use any portage code published after tomorrow, but so what? How=20 much code is that actually going to be? Same with the docs, that was published under CC Attribution/Share-Alike.=20 I can rip all of http://www.gentoo.org/doc/ right now with wget, remove=20 the Gentoo logo and stick it up on any web site I feel like as long as=20 I clearly say (preferably on every page) that the original was written=20 for and copyrighted by the Gentoo Foundation. Nothing anyone does now=20 or in the future can legally prevent me from doing that. Trying to undo the GPL on Gentoo's creative works will be distro=20 suicide, as no distro has ever managed it, and Gentoo is in no position=20 to try. Red Hat is the most business-savvy Linux out there and they are=20 very very careful to GPL every last keystroke. SuSE tried to keep Yast=20 proprietary but when Novell bought them, the community forced their=20 hand and now Yast is open source and we have OpenSuSE a la Fedora.=20 Ubuntu is moving toward GLPing Launchpad last I heard (I can't fathom=20 why it's taking so long...) No distro has ever managed to succeed in the Linux market with anything=20 other than the GPL, fully and completely complied with. I don't doubt that Daniel has financial goals for Gentoo. The original=20 reason he left, amongst others, was because he couldn't get this past=20 the other leaders at the time, and he had pressing financial needs.=20 It's not unusual to negotiate these things behind closed doors. I sure=20 as hell wouldn't do it in public right now. Heck, I'd have to contend=20 with people like myself who factually couldn't add much to the=20 negotiations but certainly have an opinion. No thanks, I wouldn't do it=20 that way. I don't see much of a downside overall. If worst comes to worst then=20 Daniel kills Gentoo and we fork. =2D-=20 Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list