[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [arch-announce] Re: very old thread and the problems

From: Barry Fitzgerald
Subject: Re: [arch-announce] Re: very old thread and the problems
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2002 13:42:32 +0000 (UTC)

On Fri, 9 Aug 2002, Tom Lord wrote:

>       > you no longer know how to act civil.
> Before you jump to conclusions, study Larry's public posts, especially
> about arch, carefully, and in the larger context.  Perhaps you are
> right, but I am personaly quite certain that you have placed the
> "uncivil" blame incorrectly.  You might also want to consider
> improvements in, for (one small) example, disk technology since the
> time bk was written.

You know, I've been watching this thread and I have a few comments:

First, I replied because Tom is right with this message... After reading
the lkml archives a number of months back about bitkeeper (and after
realizing that the Linux kernel is starting to become a lost cause because
it's maintainer is intent upon making it more and more poprietary over
time.  Or, at the very least, dependant on proprietary software.) I did
not walk away with an impression of Larry that could be called civil.
Some of his and Linus' statements about people who have ideological
beliefs about software were, frankly, insulting.

Linus and Larry made general comments about a group of people who never
really did anything to them except call them on the fact that bitkeeper
was proprietary and that a lot of people didn't want to depend on
proprietary software.  And then everyone with an ideological belief is
called idiots, morons, and for all intents and purposes - completely

Being a person who believes that ethics comes before profit (or would you
own slaves if it were legal?) and who believes in the thought of a Free
Market... I find myself to be a person who makes choices based on
ideology.  Proprietary software is a perversion of the Free Market.  So,
being of the group who was so squarely insulted - I felt insulted.  So,
Larry, when did *I* piss on your cheerios? :)

Anyway, enough ranting...

My second point is... what the hell is going on?

I mean, I've gleaned some of the background on this from the messages but
I still have no idea where this is going.  I've been on both sides - the
jilted and the jilter... and can certainly understand them...

But, what I can say is some advice that was given to me long ago:

Guys, take a cooling down period.  Maybe a couple of days.  Sit down and
talk about this ON CIVIL TERMS...

All of this that has transpired (I'm sure on both sides) is not helping

Tom: chill out man.  I know how it feels to be in a bind, but you will
benefit from kind of sitting back here and taking things publicly from a
less emotional standpoint.

Michael: Obviously, there's no specific obligation for Red Hat to do a
thing (unless there's a contract that I don't know about)... but, Tom is
providing value for Red Hat if they choose to take it.  Wouldn't it be
possible to perhaps work with some people for trying to at least help Tom
find funding?

I guess what I'm trying to say is: if this whole thing can cool off, can
you guys work together to do something? anything?  can't we all just get
along? :)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]