Re: RMS Linux anyone?
On Oct 18, Detlev Zundel wrote:
>
> > > Damn they make it look like they are the first and only one committed
> > > to open source stuff... This just makes me angry.
> >
> > I don't see a word in that page that implies that "they are the first
> > and only one committed to open source stuff." IMHO, if they want to
> > support the FSF explicitly with one product, more speed to them.
> >
> > Though it would be better if they donated 1% of all of their sales to
> > FSF, or even $1 from every Red Hat package sold.
>
> Well yes - I agree that they do not expressly say that. I didn't say that
> in the first place. What made my nerves tingle is the omission of the
> fact that there /is/ such a distribution already that did not show up only
> yesterday - namely Debian as the official partner of the FSF... How many
> people will now think that RMS supports RedHat?? I hope not too many.
I agree the naming is a bit dubious, as it implies an endorsement
(which I don't believe exists here). Having said that, I don't think
Debian is "the official partner of the FSF"; RMS has had reservations
about an "official partnership" because of the mentioning of non-free
on the website, and a few other issues.
> [f'up honored but I still think some people from devel are interested.]
Non-technical discussions belong on -project now... if they're
interested, they should subscribe ;-)
Chris
--
=============================================================================
| Chris Lawrence | You have a computer. Do you have Linux? |
| <quango@watervalley.net> | http://www.linux-m68k.org/index.html |
| | |
| Open Directory Editor | Visit the Lurker's Guide to Babylon 5: |
| http://dmoz.org/ | <*> http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/ <*> |
=============================================================================
Reply to: