
Gnome to Split Off from GNU Project? - chanux
http://www.pwnage.ca/?p=433
======
wheels
There's a better article here, with background on the issue of VMWare
employees talking about their work on planet.gnome.org and RMS objecting to
that:

<http://www.itwire.com/content/view/29995/1090/1/2/>

------
rwl
For those looking for context, it looks like RMS jumped in on the discussion
here:
[http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnome.foundation.general...](http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnome.foundation.general/5987)

~~~
ErrantX
And this post is what seems to have sparked the "divergent interests"
discussion:
[http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnome.foundation.general/...](http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnome.foundation.general/5913/focus=5987)

As I read it? It's just Stallman ranting again, a little. It usually gets
someone's back up till they remember to ignore stuff like this ;)

------
jmillikin
Keep in mind that this is just one developer, and that the votes of at least
40 more are required. It is unlikely that GNOME will split from GNU.

After all, GNOME was formed as a Free alternative to KDE (back when KDE wasn't
capital-F Free).

~~~
houseabsolute
Splitting with GNU and becoming un-Free are two totally different events. The
reason for GNOME's formation has nothing to do with the current situation.

------
hyyypr
I'm not quite familiar with GNOME. What are the proprietary softwares that
they bundle ?

~~~
rbanffy
The Mono platform, upon which some parts of Gnome rely, is regarded by some as
a patent minefield. There is too much Microsoft IP related to C# and the .NET
framework (of which Mono is a partial implementation) for the GNU folks to
feel comfortable.

The danger is that Microsoft has a long history of threatening companies that
rely on free software that their products infringe a host of never disclosed
patents. Novell, the single largest sponsor for Gnome, made an agreement with
Microsoft that granted them immunity against patent lawsuits for their
clients, but nobody else.

A couple months back they sued Tomtom for using that horrible kludge for
supporting long file names on FAT. Microsoft patented this specific kludge.

~~~
jmillikin
The subset of C# used in Tomboy and F-Spot is considered "safe" by Mono
developers and the FSF alike. Most arguments about "minefields" concern
Microsoft-specific libraries, such as WinForms and ASP.NET, which GNOME won't
touch with a 10-foot pole.

~~~
rbanffy
"Most arguments about "minefields" concern Microsoft-specific libraries, such
as WinForms and ASP.NET, which GNOME won't touch with a 10-foot pole."

I am glad to hear that. The risk of Microsoft throwing a wrench on all this
effort because some people can't resist being MS-compatible is too high. It's
been a long time, if ever, since Microsoft was known for playing fair.

And if some parts won't be touched with a 10-foot pole, why are they there
anyway?

~~~
tl
"And if some parts won't be touched with a 10-foot pole, why are they there
anyway?"

Porting legacy windows apps that use those features, completeness and when did
"because we can" stop being enough reason?

------
tudorachim
After reading that post I'm still confused about why they want to "split off."

~~~
w00pla
Because they realised that Richard Stallman isn't just eccentric, he is crazy.

The easier and more rational option would be to just institutionalize
Stallman. Unfortunately some people are opposed to that because of sentimental
reasons.

~~~
amix
Stallman isn't crazy. He is an extremist just like Ghandi was an extremist. I
think many years from now we will view Stallman as our times Ghandi - -
someone who was extreme, but fought for a good cause.

~~~
stephenjudkins
Richard Stallman? Like Gandhi? Really?

It's computer software, folks. One can make very strong claims that free
software is better or preferable to proprietary software without putting it in
the manichaean terms that Stallman does.

As far as injustices in the world goes, proprietary software is pretty damn
far down. A friend of mine was called "evil" to his face by Richard Stallman
because he once worked at Microsoft. "Evil" is a (bit of a) loaded term and
not appropriate for someone who also has contributed a great deal to the open-
source community. I can't imagine how incidents like this, and Stallman's
absolutely-no-compromise attitude in general, do more good than harm to the
free software movement.

People need to keep things in perspective.

~~~
omouse
_It's computer software, folks._

Computer software runs just about everything in the world. It is a multi-
billion dollar industry that employees many many people. It isn't _just_
anything.

His no-compromises method has done far more for the movement than anything. If
you want some comprimes, look to the Open Source movement and the BSD license.

~~~
elblanco
>It is a multi-billion dollar industry that employees many many people.

Which is exactly why RMS is viewed as extreme. If the world followed his
philosophy, it would not be a "multi-billion dollar industry that employs many
many people." It would be slightly larger than HAM radio, full of smart and
well meaning hobbyists trying to scratch personal itches but not adding up to
much of consequence (which pretty much describes the state of the movement
today).

RMSs response has always been a vague bit of handwaving about creating more
innovative business processes around the free software but which basically
amount to every software company becoming a services company. I'm sorry, but I
really don't need or want services for 99.995% of the software I use every
day.

------
rbanffy
Since we are talking mostly about Mono, why not split Gnome in two parts, the
Mono-free part, which I would be very comfortable to use, and the Microsoft-
booby-trapped part that includes Mono and stuff that depends on it?

~~~
jmillikin
Who's talking about Mono? The GNU complaint is that some ex-GNOME developers
are promoting proprietary software through GNOME channels. Another developer
was offended by this complaint, and decided to troll the list.

Additionally, there's nothing "booby-trapped" about Mono. I don't contribute
to Mono applications much any more, because I don't think it'll advance the
Linux desktop as much as other stacks, but there's no _danger_ in using Mono.

Based on Stallman's articles regarding Mono and Linux, he feels the same way
-- it's safe as currently used, but not the best choice.

~~~
rbanffy
I am sorry. Digging further in showed this is not about Mono but an apparently
much smaller problem - the way some proprietary technologies are presented.

As for Mono not being dangerous, I am still unconvinced. Microsoft has a lot
of patents, some, undoubtedly, covering .NET-related technologies that have
Mono counterparts. Microsoft also has threatened before to enter lawsuits
against those who use them. Empty threats or not, I would go as far as to try
to stay as far from it as possible.

~~~
dtf
What I've never understood is why those who have complained bitterly about
Mono being included in distributions seem to keep their mouths shut when it
comes to Samba and multimedia - both arguably worse in terms of "patent
minefields", and yet a core part of most distributions.

~~~
rbanffy
I think Samba enjoys some protection, at least on the EU, based on the
interoperability requirements imposed on MS. Moving against it would be
suicidal for Microsoft.

As for multimedia, I guess it's because the patents are not Microsoft's.

In any case, I think none is installed by default and most of multimedia stuff
is not even on the default server. I am quite happy with whatever Nautilus
calls "SSH" for quick stuff and NFS, because I learned it so long ago.

