From: Rui Miguel Silva Seabra (rms@1407.org)
Date: Tue Jun 11 2002 - 10:16:42 EDT
On Tue, 2002-06-11 at 14:48, Alan Horkan wrote:
> On 11 Jun 2002, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> > Why using a proprietary search engine when you have Free Software
> > alternatives?
> > It is too weird using proprietary software in the development of Free
> > Software...
> <sarcasm>
> Yeah, open source software using proprietary tools
> thats *really weird* and
> NEVER happens
> </sarcasm>
> Linus user Bitkeeper
> http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=98/10/16/007243&mode=nested&tid=106
> much to Richard Stallmans annoyance
That is a true annoyance, totally uneeded, and a common recurrent thread
on linux-kernel. It is not good to REQUIRE non Free Software to
*properly* develop Free Software.
Note that if you don't use bitkeeper you will probably be in a great
technical disadvantage in regards to other developers, and that may give
more trouble than needed to make improvements to the Linux kernel. That
somewhat inhibits the 4th Freedom (if you don't want to resort to fork
the code, which is probably not a good idea, right now).
> Abiword until recently did not compile for windows withough Microsoft
> Visual C++
That is allowed because it is a major part of development on a
proprietary system (in this case Windows and MS Visual C++). It is
directly covered on the GPL FAQ, and you can go and skim it looking for
that Q, it is only good to learn :)
url: http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html
The usage of a non Free Software system is bad enough for you, so using
that system's common tools of development to provide multi-platform Free
Software is not bad is not bad since you will be using one less
proprietary application (MS Word, hopefully).
> /me is against religious fundamentalism
I wasn't going to comment, but I decided that I should say something,
after seeing so many flaimbaits, some of which drawn from ignorance.
You are so quick to jump start with hints of accusations (eg: that
remark above) and yet you completely miss the point.
I (and I suppose anyone with enough IQ) can't condone religious
fundamentalism. This is not religious fundamentalism however, but an
atention both to ethical means of development and to legal details we
are forced to deal with since we live in a world with Copyright (and its
distortions).
There is no need to use proprietary software, so why recommend it?
Cheers,
-- + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jun 11 2002 - 10:19:20 EDT