Message-ID: <20070625132853.GH10008@csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
Date:	Mon, 25 Jun 2007 09:28:53 -0400
From:	lsorense@...lub.uwaterloo.ca (Lennart Sorensen)
To:	Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@...hat.com>
Cc:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>,
	davids@...master.com,
	"Linux-Kernel@...r. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: how about mutual compatibility between Linux's GPLv2 and GPLv3?

On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 03:00:30AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> That was a given from the start.  The spin that there was any chance
> whatsoever it could possibly happen was just that.  Even if Linus
> could possibly consider this, others have made it pretty clear that
> this was never an option for them, and Linus' explosion at my first
> one-liner intervention on GPLv3 isn't exactly a sign of being
> considering something reasonably.
> 
> So, no, as I've repeatedly stated, I wasn't here to convince anyone to
> adopt GPLv3.  I know you won't believe me.  I don't care.
> 
> I was here to dispell the lies that were being spread about GPLv3, the
> spirit and the goals of the GPL, as far as I understood them.  I knew
> from the start that it was an uphill battle, and that I wouldn't be
> able to convince those who distrusted the FSF so much that they would
> listen to anything that resembled an FSF discourse with an extremely
> high rejection level.  This was all expected.

Just because someone has a different opinion than you or the FSF does
not make what they say a lie.  Is that particularly difficult to
understand?  It is exactly this kind of nonsense that makes people not
want to listen to the FSF and its advocates.

> I wasn't here to convince them.  I knew I wouldn't.  I was here to set
> the record straight on the spirit of the GPL, not towards the most
> vocal opponents, but for others who hadn't formed an opinion,
> prejudiced or not.  I was here to inform about GPLv3, not to push it.

Well what the spirit is, is certainly debateable, and it seems there
probably won't ever be a consensus on that.  The thoughts in the head of
RMS are not the only ones that count in the world.

> That I was perceived as pushing it is not surprising at all.  The
> perception of "being forced" whenever something resembling the FSF
> ideology comes up is so strong here that some people just stop
> listening, stop thinking rationally (limbic system take-over?), or
> even get into outright name calling.  No surprise here.  I knew this
> was hostile territory, and I came prepared for this.

Any organization that claims anyone that doesn't agree with its view of
thw world and its interpretation of some written text is "confused" will
be treated like all other religigous fanatics, and not listened too.
Intelligent people know better than to listen to such groups.  Some of
us really can think for ourselves and don't have to be spoonfed
beliefs.

> I feel I have accomplished my goal: I've informed a lot of people
> about the GPL, about GPLv3, about Free Software and even about the
> FSFes.  Whether they make a decision for GPLv3, GPLv2, or more liberal
> Free Software licenses, is up to them.  Now, people who'd only been
> exposed to the prevailing views in this list can take something
> different into account, and make more-informed decisions.

I think I know exactly as much about the GPL now as I did two weeks ago.
Repeating the same arguments to people again and again when they
consider the argument invalid isn't going to change their minds.

--
Len Sorensen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists