Kernel developers' position on GPLv3

Alfred M. Szmidt ams at
Tue Sep 26 17:12:08 UTC 2006

   > > You say that simply because you cannot use it how _you_ want,
   > > the whole system must be junked, you could simply install a
   > > webbrowser and use the system, or a PDF viewer, all of this is
   > > free software and not very hard to do.

   Firstly, I have a couple of web browsers installed, including
   Firefox, but they do not work with the system.

Have you reported the bugs you have experienced to the GPLv3
commentary people?

   Secondly, web browsers are too large to download over GSM, I don't
   even have a telephone landline at the moment (thanks BT) and I
   can't see how to download stuff to removable media on the public
   library computers.

Most people do not use GSM or public library computers for these kind
of things.

   I say it should be junked simply because it makes various
   undocumented particular software demands, instead of using
   widely-available accessible tools.

They are using widely-available tools, standard web browsers and
document viwers.  You seem to be in the minority (like me actually),
and if you wish to have your needs catered for you can always pay
someone or even improve the commenting system yourself.  Saying that a
perfectly usable system for the majority of people should be junked
simply because you dislike it isn't useful.

   > > PDF viewers and web browsers are the most basic tools these
   > > days.

   PDF viewers are more basic than text editors, eh?

For most people, yes.  But both you and I are in a minority which
preferse text over PDF.  

   > > Maybe if you paid the people who made the whole GPLv3
   > > commenting infrastructure you might get what you want, but
   > > until then, they are going to work on something the majority of
   > > people can use easily, and they have done a wonderful job
   > > achiving that IMHO.

   If FSF needs help or funding to get a working comment system, they
   should ask for it in good time.  I'd chip in and I'm sure many
   others would too, but I would not pay the people who made the
   current inaccessible system.

I didn't imply that they needed funding, but if you want _your_ needs
catered for, then you should pay them instead of claiming that they
have made it hard for anyone to follow the process.

But if you can contribute to the FSF, or the FSFE then you should of
course do so!  Money is always a needed thing.


More information about the Discussion mailing list