On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 11:33 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Les wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 13:45 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote: > > > > > Why should I be interested in a distribution that makes it > > > difficult for me to make my own choices about whether a license > > > > > > >> is acceptable or not? I don't have a problem with downloading > >> my own copy of any >> particular code from any particular > >> place under any conditions that I find acceptable. > > > > But that is the problem. The folks with proprietary want to limit your > > use to only the systems they have chosen to support, thus you can end up > > with instruments or software that you have purchased that will not run > > when the OS changes. > > > > That's hardly unique to proprietary software. I once relied heavily on > CIPE as a VPN, but FC2 just dumped it with no replacement. Yes, I could > have kept all the broken pieces of the source code... > > > > > Furthermore their licenses forbid you from reverse > > engineering the code to figure out how to make it work some where else, > > and the owner of the proprietary OS won't let you do any reverse > > engineering legally to figure out how to interface to the software or > > hardware he/she/it chooses to no longer support. > > > > I'm perfectly willing to take the chance that if I need something there > will be a proprietary vendor. Aside from it being a silly argument > particularly when we are starting from a point where the free version is the > one that doesn't work, why is it anyone else's business? > > > > Thus you are obsoleted > > > with no legal recourse. > > > > Fedora is hardly in a position to talk about obsolescence being a problem > since they force it on everyone with every version. > > > > > Those lovely sites where you download such > > utilities are often legally not clean to use either, depending upon the > > laws that the various entities have seen fit to pass. > > > > Ummm, we were talking about Sun Java, here. Remember, the one that defines > the standard. The one you can download for free from their own web site. > Fedora is the site that ships the non-conforming version and the one that is > going to be obsolete. > > > > > Finally your own > > documents, code and other encoded data may be unaccessable to you > > either, because the formatting, encoding, encryption or compression may > > be proprietary and non disclosed with the attendant no reverse > > engineering clauses, leaving you without access even to your own > > material. > > > > Again - Sun Java. The programming language. The thing that everyone other > than Sun has tried to corrupt by making incompatible versions that suit > their own agendas better. Do you really expect fedora to ship utilities to > fix the programs you wrote earlier under their non-conforming version to run > under the real thing when they switch? > > > > > That is why these licenses, and the subject of libre or free software is > > important. > > > > Following standards is what is important and what prevents it from being a > problem when you switch components. The version that fedora ships is a > non-standard one. They aren't doing anyone any favors by making it > difficult to use the real one. > > May i ask why you use Fedora if its such a royal pain in the ass? Max -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
