headers
Fernando Cassia | 28 Apr 2011 11:56
Picon
Gravatar

Re: OpenJDK Governing Board Minutes: 20011/4/21

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 6:17 AM, Mark Wielaard <mark@...> wrote:
> So, how do you propose this so called "governing board" goes about
> convincing people like Andrew to not throw up their hands in disgust at
> ignoring the people doing actual community work and trying very hard not
> to just have to give up on OpenJDK and fork away? This board is largely
> made up of people which are not even actual OpenJDK hackers.

I know very little things, Mark. I just have a few opinions, one of
them is that the companies that have put more man hours into a project
(or even, created them!) and pays for most of its developers should
have a bigger say in the direction a given FOSS project, than a few
vocal chronic complainers that apparently would only be happy if such
companies "give up" all control of the project, all in the name of
"community" of course.

The FSF has repeatedly refused to take down RMS´ anti-java rant "the
java trap" article even while it has been renedered obsolete years
ago, the moment Sun Microsystems decided to release Java SE as Free
Software.

So, "it takes two for tango", and sadly -as a former FSF contributor-,
I can´t say I know what the FSF´s true intentions are anymore, and
that rants like Andrew´s which start by attacking the governing board
contribute very little to a climate of collaboration or moving things
forward, unless of course the aim is to create the self-fulfilling
prophecy, that is in this case, a fork.

But hey, that´s me and my probably wrong, baseless and biased
opinions, I´m sure.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Dr Andrew John Hughes | 28 Apr 2011 12:15
Picon
Gravatar

Re: OpenJDK Governing Board Minutes: 20011/4/21

On 28 April 2011 10:56, Fernando Cassia <fcassia@...> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 6:17 AM, Mark Wielaard <mark@...> wrote:
>> So, how do you propose this so called "governing board" goes about
>> convincing people like Andrew to not throw up their hands in disgust at
>> ignoring the people doing actual community work and trying very hard not
>> to just have to give up on OpenJDK and fork away? This board is largely
>> made up of people which are not even actual OpenJDK hackers.
>
>
> I know very little things, Mark. I just have a few opinions, one of
> them is that the companies that have put more man hours into a project
> (or even, created them!) and pays for most of its developers should
> have a bigger say in the direction a given FOSS project, than a few
> vocal chronic complainers that apparently would only be happy if such
> companies "give up" all control of the project, all in the name of
> "community" of course.
>

We're not saying they shouldn't have a say or even a "bigger say" than
others.  We're
saying that they shouldn't have the only say, which is what this
governing board tries to
establish.

These "few vocal chronic complainers" are the same ones that have actually
made OpenJDK successful by making it available to users.  It is one thing to
drop a bundle of code over the wall.  It's quite another to make a community
project out of it.

> The FSF has repeatedly refused to take down RMS´ anti-java rant "the
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Andrew Haley | 28 Apr 2011 12:20
Picon
Favicon

Re: OpenJDK Governing Board Minutes: 20011/4/21

On 28/04/11 11:15, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> On 28 April 2011 10:56, Fernando Cassia <fcassia@...> wrote:
> 
>> So, "it takes two for tango", and sadly -as a former FSF contributor-,
>> I can´t say I know what the FSF´s true intentions are anymore, and
>> that rants like Andrew´s which start by attacking the governing board
>> contribute very little to a climate of collaboration or moving things
>> forward, unless of course the aim is to create the self-fulfilling
>> prophecy, that is in this case, a fork.
> 
> I don't see what the FSF has to do with this.

I think Fernando is confused by your email address.

Andrew.
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Dr Andrew John Hughes | 28 Apr 2011 12:26
Picon
Gravatar

Re: OpenJDK Governing Board Minutes: 20011/4/21

On 28 April 2011 11:20, Andrew Haley <aph@...> wrote:
> On 28/04/11 11:15, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>> On 28 April 2011 10:56, Fernando Cassia <fcassia@...> wrote:
>>
>>> So, "it takes two for tango", and sadly -as a former FSF contributor-,
>>> I can´t say I know what the FSF´s true intentions are anymore, and
>>> that rants like Andrew´s which start by attacking the governing board
>>> contribute very little to a climate of collaboration or moving things
>>> forward, unless of course the aim is to create the self-fulfilling
>>> prophecy, that is in this case, a fork.
>>
>> I don't see what the FSF has to do with this.
>
> I think Fernando is confused by your email address.
>

Ah, ok.  member.fsf.org does not mean I have any affiliation with the
FSF other than my associate membership.

Equally, I'm not posting from my work account as these are my views
and not necessarily those of my employer.

> Andrew.
>

--

-- 
Andrew :-)

Free Java Software Engineer
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Mark Wielaard | 28 Apr 2011 12:48
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: OpenJDK Governing Board Minutes: 20011/4/21

On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 06:56 -0300, Fernando Cassia wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 6:17 AM, Mark Wielaard <mark@...> wrote:
> > So, how do you propose this so called "governing board" goes about
> > convincing people like Andrew to not throw up their hands in disgust at
> > ignoring the people doing actual community work and trying very hard not
> > to just have to give up on OpenJDK and fork away? This board is largely
> > made up of people which are not even actual OpenJDK hackers.
>
> I know very little things, Mark. I just have a few opinions, one of
> them is that the companies that have put more man hours into a project
> (or even, created them!) and pays for most of its developers should
> have a bigger say in the direction a given FOSS project, than a few
> vocal chronic complainers that apparently would only be happy if such
> companies "give up" all control of the project, all in the name of
> "community" of course.

Nobody I know is saying that. Of course the more you contribute, the
more say you have in a project. All I see is people pointing out that
such influence should be earned, not dictated by creating special rights
for certain companies.

> The FSF has repeatedly refused to take down RMS´ anti-java rant "the
> java trap" article even while it has been renedered obsolete years
> ago, the moment Sun Microsystems decided to release Java SE as Free
> Software.

As far as I know the FSF celebrated that release:
http://www.fsf.org/news/fsf-welcomes-gpl-java.html
And explained the Java Trap is no more by adding a giant "Headnote" to
their old article explaining that "the Java language as such is no
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Simon Phipps | 28 Apr 2011 13:27
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: OpenJDK Governing Board Minutes: 20011/4/21


On 28 Apr 2011, at 11:48, Mark Wielaard wrote:

> On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 06:56 -0300, Fernando Cassia wrote:
>> 
>> The FSF has repeatedly refused to take down RMS´ anti-java rant "the
>> java trap" article even while it has been renedered obsolete years
>> ago, the moment Sun Microsystems decided to release Java SE as Free
>> Software.
> 
> As far as I know the FSF celebrated that release:
> http://www.fsf.org/news/fsf-welcomes-gpl-java.html
> And explained the Java Trap is no more by adding a giant "Headnote" to
> their old article explaining that "the Java language as such is no
> longer a trap":
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html

Indeed, I have a video of RMS asserting that the Java Trap no longer applies to Java - see
http://wmk.me/JavaTrap to view it.

S.
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Fernando Cassia | 28 Apr 2011 14:45
Picon
Gravatar

Re: OpenJDK Governing Board Minutes: 20011/4/21

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 8:27 AM, Simon Phipps <simon@...> wrote:
> Indeed, I have a video of RMS asserting that the Java Trap no longer applies to Java - see
http://wmk.me/JavaTrap to view it.

I was speaking to the strange reluctance to pull it down, specially
when some search requests end up with "the java trap" among the first
results.

Would the FSF be OK with an article titled "The Free Software Trap"
even if it includes a headline on top saying "this is no longer the
case".?

In any case, the FSF told me it´ll "stay there forever".

---
> I wonder why does that article still need be on-
> line?.

It'll stay there forever, but yes, it will be updated to reflect OpenJDK.

--
Matt Lee
Campaigns Manager
Free Software Foundation
---

FC
--

-- 
"It begins with a blessing
And it ends with a curse;
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Dr Andrew John Hughes | 29 Apr 2011 03:06
Picon
Gravatar

Re: OpenJDK Governing Board Minutes: 20011/4/21

On 28 April 2011 12:27, Simon Phipps <simon@...> wrote:
>
> On 28 Apr 2011, at 11:48, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 06:56 -0300, Fernando Cassia wrote:
>>>
>>> The FSF has repeatedly refused to take down RMS´ anti-java rant "the
>>> java trap" article even while it has been renedered obsolete years
>>> ago, the moment Sun Microsystems decided to release Java SE as Free
>>> Software.
>>
>> As far as I know the FSF celebrated that release:
>> http://www.fsf.org/news/fsf-welcomes-gpl-java.html
>> And explained the Java Trap is no more by adding a giant "Headnote" to
>> their old article explaining that "the Java language as such is no
>> longer a trap":
>> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html
>
> Indeed, I have a video of RMS asserting that the Java Trap no longer applies to Java - see
http://wmk.me/JavaTrap to view it.
>
> S.
>
>

On the subject of videos and FOSDEM, I've finally found time to start
sorting out the recordings from FOSDEM 2011.

You can now get Simon's talk from the Free Java event, "Lessons Open
Sourcing Java Taught Me", which included discussion on the governance
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |

Gmane