Insiders, huh?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| IDontWantAName May 30, 2005 8:27 PM EDT |
Why are there 'insiders' on an open standard for licensing? That seems just a LITTLE bit contradictory to me. All I can see in that article is something like, "We are elitist pigs who want to come off like really cool and utterly important hippies". Declining comments, selected viewers of a new version of the GPL, insiders telling news media what's going on... what is this? I feel like it's time to put on my tin foil hat and start shooting aliens. |
| r_a_trip May 31, 2005 7:09 AM EDT |
Why are there 'insiders' on an open standard for licensing? Isn't this clear? A license is a legal document that conveys certain rights to its recipient. As it has to be written in legalese, it is a wise thing to have the first draft written by lawyers, so that the general ideas of the FSF are cast into a legally usable form. Community involvement will be much more productive if there is a semi-final form available to comment on. If anybody can make suggestions first and then have that incorporated into a license, I bet the result would not become GPL V3. That is why there is a first "closed" round to get ideas and input from those who really depend on the GPL. Would you post a request on slashdot to revise the GPL and accept whatever the "unwashed masses" come up with? |
| IDontWantAName May 31, 2005 11:33 AM EDT |
I certinally wouldn't submit an unwashed GPL to the masses, AND ASK FOR INPUT on it. I would expect, however, that (especially with the great number of open letters RMS/FSF produces) the progress and various improvements, etc. would not be insider information. Just because we may see something doesn't mean we can comment upon it. For those interested enough in it to comment on it when the time does come, knowing the work that's put into the new changes sounds a lot better than looking at something for the first time with no point of reference other than 'it's new.' Personally, I completely distrust this notion of private viewing beforehand etc. and it makes me question my usage of the GPL in the future. It's great to have input from those who are investing in the FSF project, but it doesn't feel like little old basement developer is getting anything by it when they haven't a clue what development is happening in the land of the lawyers planning to change this Open license. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!