Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté :
> Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >RMS is the philosopher king of the Free Software Foundation. Whether
> >he is also autocratic, that is, "a dictatorial ruler", I don't know
> >because I am not a member of the FSF.
>
> As a GCC developer, I can tell you: He is autocratic. Sadly.
According to the definition we brought to this list of autocracy
(someone who thinks he got absolute power), I can discuss your point
of view.
RMS usually accept to read everyone's point of view (unless they are
obviously offensive). So it cannot be that autocrat you're talking
about.
Indeed he leads some projects the way he wants to exactly and if
you're in, you have to accept it or to leave. But he also gave you the
freedom to take his software and to use it to make your own software.
If every "autocrat" was giving the permission to execute / read /
modify / redistribute their work, I wish to see many more autocrats
out there.
The way a project is managed/directed may only be an issue for people
involved, in they can continue this project with another direction. In
the GCC case, to name it, you're completely free to continue the
project without RMS - but the project will not be the same at the end.
That's all.
--
Mathieu Roy
Homepage:
http://yeupou.coleumes.org
Not a native english speaker:
http://stock.coleumes.org/doc.php?i=/misc-files/flawed-english
