Re: DLEDFORD IS GREAT

Oscar Fernandez Cantero (ofcantero@ceife.es)
Mon, 16 Nov 1998 11:50:51 +0100

Gerard Roudier wrote:
>
> On Mon, 9 Nov 1998, Bob Taylor wrote:
>
> > In message <Pine.LNX.3.95.981109210642.369B-100000@localhost>, Gerard Roudier w
> > rites:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > My concern is a more general problem:
> > >
> > > All these $$ for Linux may lead to too much contributions by commercial
> > > companies and to fiew independant contributions, because:
> > >
> > > 1 - Independant contributors have less time and resources.
> > > 2 - If the work is done by companies, independant contributor get useless,
> > > and useless things generally disappear.
> > >
> > > Now, if suddenly, for whatever reason, these companies will decide to stop
> > > their linux $$ support, it may happen that independant contributors will
> > > not be enough or have enough knowledge of Linux in order to maintain it
> > > alive.
> >
> > On what planet do you live? Do you realize how *stupid* this is?
>
> What is stupid? Not to live on the same planet as yours or not to think
> as inhabitants of your planet do?
> Are you from the planet where $$ make people get large eyes bright and
> red and have long and sharp teeth?
> No, it is definitely not my planet.
>
> > > On the other hand, $$ may stear Linux in a so evil direction that some
> > > famous contributors may decide to give up the project, just not to feel
> > > them as idiot for the rest of their life.
> >
> > Do you express the same concern when corporations send a check to the FSF?
>
> I express about Linux at Linux lists.
>
> > Hmm? Be happy! Evil? Sheesh!
>
> What's that ? Is it martian language ?

Hello all,

let me say some considerations:

>From my point of view any monetary contribution to a free software
project
is always good by itself. But a generalised change of the way in which
Linux
is developed can be dangerous.

The point is
if Linux (GNU) has become great and independent has been thanks to its
development
model, lots of people making it right because they like it, not because
they are
paid and not because they have a pressure to do it (like developers do
at commercial
companies).

As an example, let me point out the actual differences between the KDE
status and the Gnome status, I don't know, but it seems to me that an
absolutely independent project (KDE) evolves to get a better result that
a company leaded project (Gnome, Red Hat) (This is just my opinion).
Don't misunderstand me, I love Red Hat and their company model. I just
think that the
roll of a company in the free software world must be to contribute as
any other
organization or individual, never to have the property of a project (Red
Hat don't
have the property of the Gnome project)

Anyway, it's possible that this way of thinking is better understood in
Europe.

In the other hand, if the development of Linux was dependent on the
money
of a few companies, and this was so for years, these companies would
have
the capacity of bringing Linux up or down when they want. I don't think
this was good at all for all of us.

I ask, Is there at the moment any way of avoid this danger?

I think what Gerard says is not so stupid at all.

Thanks for reading and best regards to everybody.

-- 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------
 Oscar Fernández Cantero  <ofcantero@ceife.es>
 CEIFE  -  Centro Español de Investigación Farmacoepidemiológica
 Almirante 28 2º          http://www.ceife.es
 28004 MADRID,  SPAIN
 Phone: +34 91 531 7975
 Fax:   +34 91 531 2871
 -------------------------------------------------------------------


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