Why no mention of GNU?

[David Allouche]

On Wed, 2005-04-13 at 18:39 -0500, J.B. Nicholson-Owens wrote:
>    "Some people who contribute to GCC may hold open-source views--we don't
>     insist contributors must agree with the GNU Project on these questions--but
>     GCC overall is part of the free software movement."
> 
>                  -- from http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-07/msg00873.html,
>                     a post to the GCC mailing list by RMS.
> 
> However, the belief that the two movements are not distinct is indefensible.

OpenSource is mostly a communication initiative created during the
dotcom bubble with the purpose of selling free software to manager
types. At this point, free software was not nearly as mainstream as it
is today and focusing on the technical rather than the political aspects
was a pragmatic thing to do.

http://www.catb.org/~esr/open-source.html

I do not agree with all that the FSF says, but I definitely stand on
their political side: free software as ethical political activism. The
OpenSource folks tend to have a slightly different perspective:
opensource as libertarian political activism. Dude!

OpenSource and free software folks are the same people working on the
same projects, in the same companies, they have similar proportions of
obtuse bonheads and brillian hackers, and they both have nutcases at
their top.
tm
It's useful to have both the FSF and the OSI as they can speak with
different voices and different arguments, they attract different people,
they act on different levels. But in the end, the differences are
minute, and arguing about them is useless quarrelling.

Pick one random non-geeky guy in a bar and explain him what linux (he
probably saw that name in the news) and free software is about. He'll
listen, I have found random Joes are often interested in the issue. You
can even make a convincing point that software is politics. Now, try to
explain to that newly enlightened random Joe how the Free Software
Foundation and the OpenSource Initiative are two irreconcilably distinct
movements that should be confused under no pretext. My bet is that is
the point where you'll start to look silly.

In the European parliament, the term used to to speak about what we are
doing is "FLOSS": Free Libre OpenSource Software. The job of members of
the parliament is politics, then know a pointless political disagreement
when they see one, and they know how to dodge it in order to get to the
point.

Call yourself free software supporter if you wish, just as I do. Make a
point to say GNU/Linux when talking about the system when that does not
get in the way of clarity, just as I do. Look up web pages and politely
ask the owner to credit GNU, it's more than I do, but I think it's a
good thing.

But step back, and ask yourself what you want to show to the world: a
bunch small groups arguing over imagined differences, or a great
community delivering concrete progress in technical and political
fields. Also, watch the "Life of Brian" from The Monthy Pythons, and
reflect on the People's Front of Judea.

-- 
                                                            -- ddaa
His shoe!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/sounder/attachments/20050414/a6dffe8d/attachment-0001.pgp