| 1 |
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Daniel Campbell <lists@××××××××.us> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 02/15/2014 08:09 PM, walt wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 02/15/2014 12:30 PM, Daniel Campbell wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> The social |
| 5 |
>>> tactics at work from the systemd team (and verily, other Red Hat |
| 6 |
>>> projects like GNOME) are reminiscent of Microsoft through the use of the |
| 7 |
>>> "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" methodology. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> I certainly share your hostility towards M$ for suppressing competition. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> Red Hat, like M$, is a for-profit corporation, so I share your suspicion |
| 12 |
>> that they want to suppress their competitors (though I don't know who |
| 13 |
>> their competitors are). |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> But comparing a completely closed-source shop like M$ to any open source |
| 16 |
>> company leaves me feeling uneasy. I can't find the exact argument to |
| 17 |
>> explain my unease, but I'm hoping someone else will jump in with a more |
| 18 |
>> rational argument. |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
> I think I understand where you're coming from. "How can they compare |
| 21 |
> when Red Hat releases their source under a liberating license while MS |
| 22 |
> locks it down behind closed doors?" |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> That's missing the point, though. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
No, it's not. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
> In the FOSS world, that's the "bait", |
| 29 |
> so to speak. The wolf in sheep's clothing. Red Hat can release (or hack |
| 30 |
> on) a bunch of attractive software or features, get people interested |
| 31 |
> (so interested that, say, the majority of distros depend on it *wink |
| 32 |
> wink*), and then use that influence to indirectly control where FOSS |
| 33 |
> moves. By striking the weakest part of the stack (sysv probably *did* |
| 34 |
> need a good replacement, but not one as ambitious as systemd) and |
| 35 |
> digging down into the kernel level (kdbus), Red Hat devs will now have a |
| 36 |
> very influential role in the FOSS world. This will in turn generate |
| 37 |
> interest (and thus profit) in Red Hat. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
First of all, you do realize that Greg Kroah-Hartman, the primary |
| 40 |
author of kdbus, works for the Linux Foundation, right? Not RedHat. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
Second, good for RedHat if they can turn a profit. Meanwhile the code |
| 43 |
from the whole stack is free, and anyone willing and able can fork it |
| 44 |
and use, enhance, or replace any part of it. And yes, I said replace. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
So, again, the comparison makes no sense at all. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
> It's marginally clever, but so clearly obvious at the same time. It's |
| 49 |
> sad (to me) that the community didn't see it coming. |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
So you are saying we are idiots? Or just naive? Or both? And *all* of |
| 52 |
us who use systemd and think is a great idea? |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
Damn, if only we had knew. Too bad you didn't come before to open our |
| 55 |
eyes to this undeniable truth. Now it's too late, the sky is falling |
| 56 |
and the world will end on fire and brim. |
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
> Those who did have |
| 59 |
> been written off as conspiracy theorists or FUDders. Time will reveal all. |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
Indeed it will. Wanna bet a beer? |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
Regards. |
| 64 |
-- |
| 65 |
Canek Peláez Valdés |
| 66 |
Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación |
| 67 |
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México |
Archives