Bradley M. Kuhn

• Contact
• Blog  
• Interviews / Articles  
• Software
• Résumé

Identi.ca Weekly Summary

Sunday 26 June 2011 by Bradley M. Kuhn

Identi.ca Summary, 2011-06-19 through 2011-06-26

• The conversation that I mentioned last week about GPL for Javascript libraries continued in a new thread this week. The thread was rather long:
  • @fontana rather strangely argued that no one should use GPL for Javascript, this seemed like a generally anti-copyleft position to me, and @fontana went on further to say he's now anti-copyleft in some situations, when it relates to proprietary relicensing.
  • I pointed out, using OpenFOAM as an example that being against illegitimate use of otherwise good things doesn't mean you need to be universally against the thing.
  • There was a subthread discussing how GPL requirements work with Javascript, but the subthread diverged into a discussion of CLAs and Fedora, wherein @fontana strangely said that multiple copyright holders won't solve proprietary relicensing problem.
  • @fontana asked for example of a GPL'd Javascript library with multiple copyright holders (i.e., one that isn't using a proprietary recliensing business model). I'd much appreciate if someone can look for an example of a GPL'd Javascript library matching the criteria @fontana describes; I haven't had time to look. I offered @fontana a prop bet on this, regardless.
  • Finally, in the same thread, @jasonriedy mentioned the so-called Lisp LGPL, which I said was a seemed unnecessary now that we have LGPLv3.
• I noted that I wrote a blog post on OpenFOAM.
• I complained about the (lack of a) USA healthcare system.
• @fontana and I had a discussion about crossposting on identi.ca.
• I ack'ed that @fabsh had launched the oggcast, rantofabkuhn.
• The biggest news this week was that @kaz is now Executive Director of the GNOME Foundation, although the thread discussing it on identica was rather short. OTOH, @fontana asked if @kaz would be required to use GNOME 3.
• The thread about @allisonrandal's appearance on Linux Outlaws continued:
  • @allisonrandal claimed to have not said that those who chose strong copyleft were just as happy with weak copyleft relicensing. I found the exact place where she said that in the LO 204 ogg file, wherein she says at 36:15 and 37:30:

    Part of that reason is that when a developer develops code they want their code to be used. They may have a general philosophy that they want used. Most developers who contribute under a copyleft license &mdash they'd be happy with any copyleft license — AGPL, GPL, LGPL — they think — that's my “set”. …

    You're using GPL and we're using LGPL, so we can't use your code. Hmmm, we can't do that! … this just doesn't fit the way developers think! We want our code to be used — and we're happy to have — if I said GPL, it's probably true that I'm happy to have it under LGPL as well. It's just too much work [without Harmony] to make that happen.

  • @allisonrandal, @fontana and I debated the differences between strong and weak copyleft in a subthread.
  • A subthread discussed who the leadership of Harmony is. I asked for a definitive place where I can find who are the decision-makers of Harmony and no one answered this, but @fontana made some speculations, @allisonrandal claims that Harmony has no leadership (I wondered but didn't dent: should people really be adopting important documents from a group with no leadership?). Also, @fabsh pointed out that he doubted that it was without leaders. @fontana pointed out that SFLC was not previously leader of Harmony; @allisonrandal says she thought they were and yet SFLC claims they weren't. I ended the subtread by asking again how Harmony governing works and got no response.
  • In a subthread, @allisonrandal reiterated that FSF was wrong to change the terms of GPL with GPLv3 (which she'd previously stated on the LO interview. I still believe her position on this ironically contradicts the plans of Harmony, which seeks to empower companies to change licenses unilaterally. (Why should companies have a right to change a license, but FSF shouldn't?)
  • I pointed out to @allisonrandal that GPLv2 already specified inside the license plans for GPLv3. @allisonrandal said in response that FSF updating GPL wasn't helpful to Free Software developers. She further claimed that FSF's update to GPLv3 constituted Manifest Destiny, which I disputed.
  • The conversation on that sub-thread descended into a discussion of @allisonrandal's culturally relativistic attitude toward Free Software, wherein @allisonrandal admitted she's primarily a cultural relativist.
  • Finally, there was subthread discussing how one can be pro-copyleft, believe that proprietary software is morally wrong, but also not believe permissive licensing is morally wrong. I would think such is obvious and well established by, for example, RMS' writings since 1984, but we nevertheless rehashed that old debate. In this subthread, I did point out that Harmony is biased against copyleft, and therefore is not merely an amoral proposition of all options, as @allisonrandal has claimed. (Oh, and this dent of mine in that thread was redented a bit.) I favorites and nearly redented @mlinksva's contribution to the subthread.
  • @fontana linked to a Harmony list post wherein @allisonrandal attempts to make an 11th-hour effort to remove anti-strong-copyleft parts of Harmony.
• There was a rather pointlessly lengthy thread about accents, mostly my Balmur accent (or adjusted version thereof). That discussion bled over onto another thread that started when I left @fontana a voicemail in a think Balmur accent.
• @fontana doesn't like it that I call Hitler a “dude”, even though I said evil dude.
• I was a guest on FLOSS Weekly on Wednesday. @joncruz mentioned he enjoyed the show.
• I mentioned again to @mcgrof my copyleft-by-guilt theory of OpenBSD, which I'd previously mentioned publicly, which @chromatic found amusing.
• FSF intern @williamtheaker is working this summer on some historical GPLv3 data-gathering.
• @fontana started a thread on a Fedora list and on identi.ca about Gilligan's Island copyright of the Fedora website. This was previously discussed in two threads about a month ago, wherein I coined the phrase “Gilligan's Island copyright”. @fontana gave me credit on the Fedora thread for coining the phrase. I'm working on a more complete blog post on Gilligan's Island copyright.
• dneary's blog post made me think of an old boss.
• There was a discussion of my reasons for phoning @fontana.
• My beloved plastic $2 Pretty neat travel soap dish (tray / holder) that I got in 1991 is now cracked.
• @kraai is registered to donate bone marrow. I'm considering it.
• I'm continuing to work on some patches for GNU Bash.
• Some people apparently want an @bkuhn GPL enforcement action figure.

Posted on Sunday 26 June 2011 at 16:02 by Bradley M. Kuhn.

Comment on this post in this identi.ca conversation.