standing up for one's own software freedom is "free range meta-trolling"?
Posted Jul 6, 2012 18:24 UTC (Fri) by bkuhn
In reply to: The next GPL: Why it's being shaped on GitHub (InfoWorld)
Parent article: The next GPL: Why it's being shaped on GitHub (InfoWorld)
webmink, are you seriously arguing that if someone says:
I don't want to have to use proprietary software just to participate in this community, that they are
What if you invited me to speak at a conference and said I had to give my presentation using a Mac running OSX? I know that's your preferred laptop, but would you call me a
free-range meta-troll for criticizing that requirement?
BTW, Fontana has admitted that the issue tracker on GitHub is inadequate for the needs of issue tracking for a license, so even your expedient “prefer proprietary software when it's technically better” argument fails here, at least according to Fontana.
Fontana and I would probably both agree that the right issue tracker for a license doesn't clearly exist yet. Orion and I designed stet for texts that are “like legislation”: a document already nearly complete that needed public input. Co-Ment is stet's AGPL'd intellectual heir, but it isn't the right fit for a license text in high flux.
I've asked Fontana to draw up a feature set for what an issue tracker needs to have for license development. I'm happy to be part of the solution and help create one. But in the meantime while that doesn't exist, why is a proprietary solution substandard for the task being used?
to post comments)