Kernel developers' position on GPLv3
Posted Sep 22, 2006 19:25 UTC (Fri) by mattmelton
Parent article: Kernel developers' position on GPLv3
I've read and reread this. What I'm seeing is plain: the people I admire and respect, for many reasons, have a less forward thinking approach to preserving the free model and the freedem they've enjoyed than they do APIs.
When there are so many DRM-restricted devices that the FSF has to give up enforcing the GPL because it can't audit them, legally, we'll look back at this point, and at the decisive developers and say, "they didnt WANT to look forward".
There is little (if any) comprimise in the wording. eg: if end-user restrictions are against the free software philosophy - why have a bloody licence in the first place?
I've never been so saddened with some of the developers as I am today. I'm always kicking myself, because the decisions Linus (et al) make that I disagree with usually turn out for the better... but this is one of the few issues I can understand fully...
You can't scare big business away from Linux now. Look at the mile stones made in 2.6. Look at the improvement upon system after system 2.6 has made over 2.4. No company in the right mind would desert a GPLv3 2.8 if it made only half the advances as 2.6 has.
I have a sneeky suspicion (and its entirely my own feeling) that money is behind this. Linux isnt GNU/HURD. But everyone wants HURD-esqu freedom. Now we've got a HURD-like (as in free) system, in the form of Linux, we've forgotten the values. Rich with stability.
I just hope no more software hijacks the GNU bandwagon, only to jump off when it becomes profitable.
Bring back indie development!
to post comments)