[Savannah-hackers] Re: submission of Waves, Clouds, and Sand - savannah.nongnu.org

[Mathieu Roy]

address@hidden said:

> > What we can do in our very private home, in the way I told, have
> > absolutely no consequences.
> 
> Everything we do has consequences.

Sure, let me rephrase it: the fact that I may play proprietary games
sometimes have only consequences in my own life.

Personally, I see Free Software as important on a larger scale.

> Some proprietary games have EULAs that forbid certain other software to be
> on your computer, and scan for it.  This compromises your privacy.

Frankly, my privacy is my business.

> These games also prohibit giving a copy to your friend.

Sure, that's proprietary software. People are free to make software
proprietary. It's not a good choice from my point of view, but it's a
right they have.

And naturally, I would prefer nice free games, that I could execute,
read, modify, redistribute. 

But the fact that I run a game that cannot redistribute legally do not
change the face of the world. What would change it was the fact that I
create a game that we can redistribute/etc, the fact that I help a game
that we can redistribute/etc.
 
> Depending on where you live, you might get the BSA knocking on your
> door, demanding to see receipts for everything.  That's kind of a
> bummer.

Frankly...

> Offering financial support to the makers of Windows and proprietary
> games, in addition to the makers of proprietary drivers, has
> consequences.  Not paying for it also could subject you to certain
> other consequences...

Frankly...


> > I do not understand what makes you think that making a software
> > dependant on non-free drivers would incitate ATI or Nvidia to free
> > their software. Their goal is to sell cards. More software depends
> > on it, more money.
> 
> I don't know how many times I have to explain it: What will convince
> NVidia to release free drivers is _demand_ from a large number of users
> who play free 3D games.  No free 3D games, no users, no demand, no
> drivers.

Ok :
free 3D games dependant on non-free drivers, users of non-free
drivers, user no real demand for free drivers.

No real demand for free drivers :
        - people who play the game, who are "users" in your scheme
        already accepted non-free drivers. They can ask for what they
        want, why would Nvidia and ATI cares about it... as they
        bought the card and as they use their drivers.
        They already have what they want.
        - people who dont play the game because of the drivers are no
        users in your scheme. According to your scheme, they are not 
        a demand.

> > A contrario, if you make software that do not depend on their
> > drivers explicitely because of their licenses, if your software
> > grow in popularity, ATI or Nvidia may think that freeing their
> > drivers would permit them to get a better support from your
> > software... and so would permit them to make more money by selling
> > more cards.
> 
> Right now, this is nonsense, given the state of free 3D drivers.

Are you sure?

Imagine that a so-called must-have apps make a deal with ATI and NVIDIA:
 if they free their drivers, the game will use their drivers.

The game is so amazing that both companies want people to buy their
cards to be able to play the game in a decent way.
If one of the company do not free their code, people will only buy the
other one's cards.

> > Who "exert pressure [...] to stay away from 3D"?
> 
> Yeah, Savannah is exerting pressure to stay away from modern 3D, due to
> the lack of free drivers that we've just been discussing.

That's your point of view. If 3D means proprietary, Savannah is not
for 3D. But hopefully, proprietary and 3D are not synonyms.

> Pressuring one developer is easier than trying to convince a large
> company of anything.

What you call pressuring is sticking to a policy far from being
new. The purpose of Savannah is explicitely detailled. If you want the
GNU project to work on convincing  particular companies, this is not
the right mailing-list. 

> 
> > I think that we need hardware manufacturers on our side. Having
> > proprietary drivers is clearly not having them on our side.
> 
> Right, so I'd like to hear suggestions for getting them on our side.
>
> 
> I think the suggestion will have to involve more than "use only
> features that were current with cards that are no longer on the
> market".

There's one suggestion in my message (making a deal). I'm not saying
that an easy job but that's a suggestion coherent from the GNU
position, I think.

You may agree or not, you just have to accept that the way Savannah
run. 

We are not saying that we seen the light and that hold the Truth. You
may not share our point of view and maybe your are nearer from reality
than us, but you didn't convinced us.

Finally, your problem is not specific with the Savannah position but
with the GNU project position. You should write your concern to
address@hidden instead.

Regards,



-- 
Mathieu Roy
 
 << Profile  << http://savannah.gnu.org/users/yeupou <<
 >> Homepage >> http://yeupou.coleumes.org           >>
 << GPG Key  << http://stock.coleumes.org/gpg        <<