| 1 |
My issue is not about the 'relative merits and requirements of various |
| 2 |
licenses' as such, although that does play a part. Here's the point. |
| 3 |
Microsoft plan is total world domination, they want the open internet |
| 4 |
standards to be replaced by their own closed standards, etc, etc... this is |
| 5 |
all in their long term business plan which they publish on their website |
| 6 |
(investor relations link http://www.microsoft.com/msft/) so at least they're |
| 7 |
honest about it. Red Hat, SUSE and the rest are honest about their |
| 8 |
positions as businesses, and I have no problem with any of them. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Where I have a problem is with the totally dishonest implication that |
| 11 |
gentoo.org is making. Gentoo.org is implying that they are somehow |
| 12 |
different, but it now quite clear that you are not. I think that if you |
| 13 |
were a .org in sprit rather then just a domain name, you would be proud and |
| 14 |
happy to answer my ethical concerns, but instead you are mearly brushing |
| 15 |
away and dismissing them, which is exactly what I'd expect of Microsoft, I |
| 16 |
just never expected it from a Linux .org organization. I'm also surprised |
| 17 |
that apparently so many people are helping you, giving you there own time |
| 18 |
and effort without questioning who you are. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
The reason I got interested in gentoo.org in the first place was for the |
| 21 |
very reason that you were a .org. There are lots of other Linux .com |
| 22 |
companies springing up and very few .orgs. I pleasantly surprised to find |
| 23 |
another .org and wanted to support you, I am now of course sawly |
| 24 |
dissapointed and will take your suggestion to go for debian, I think you are |
| 25 |
right, I will be happier there. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Regards, |
| 28 |
David Herbert |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
----- Original Message ----- |
| 31 |
From: "Tod M. Neidt" <tod@g.o> |
| 32 |
To: <gentoo-dev@g.o> |
| 33 |
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 6:29 PM |
| 34 |
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
> On Mon, 2002-02-04 at 12:09, David Herbert wrote: |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> > ends. Gentoo 'appears' to have strong connections to IBM, which to me |
| 40 |
> > contradicts their .org status. These are some of many reasons why I |
| 41 |
think |
| 42 |
> > that if gentoo want to be a .org they need to explain who they are, |
| 43 |
hence |
| 44 |
> > the need for a social contract. |
| 45 |
> > |
| 46 |
> |
| 47 |
> I think you might be confused by the existence of the gentoo.com domain |
| 48 |
> name. Please review this entire thread |
| 49 |
> |
| 50 |
> http://lists.gentoo.org/pipermail/gentoo-dev/2001-September/006795.html |
| 51 |
> |
| 52 |
> There can also be found threads in the archives debating the relative |
| 53 |
> merits and requirements of various licenses. |
| 54 |
> |
| 55 |
> Unless drobbins feels the need to clarify his position to you, I'm |
| 56 |
> afraid the information provided to you will have to suffice. If this is |
| 57 |
> not sufficient, I have formed the impression (rightly or wrongly) that |
| 58 |
> you would probably be more comfortable using and contributing to Debian. |
| 59 |
> |
| 60 |
> Best of Luck, |
| 61 |
> |
| 62 |
> tod |
| 63 |
> |
| 64 |
> |
| 65 |
> _______________________________________________ |
| 66 |
> gentoo-dev mailing list |
| 67 |
> gentoo-dev@g.o |
| 68 |
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev |
| 69 |
> |
Archives