On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 12:43 AM, David Greaves <da...@dgreaves.com> wrote:
> On 03/08/11 20:12, Jeremiah Foster wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 6:55 PM, David Greaves <da...@dgreaves.com >> <mailto:da...@dgreaves.com>> wrote: >> >> Take a deep breath Jeremiah :) >> meh. The ad hominem attacks are irrelevant. >> > > *that* was an attack? It was meant to remind you that we're friends. I read it as a trivialization of my concerns. A rhetorical tactic to make me appear shrill or unreasonable. (I am shrill of course, but that's not the point. :) And despite my shrillness I hope we remain friends as you are a gentleman David. > > This is not a "good" situation but it is managable and may help resolve >> some >> organisational issues wrt MeeGo - silver lining :) >> >> I have no idea what you're now trying to say. Are you saying; "It's okay >> that I >> forked the official apps for MeeGo!" Because forking is generally >> considered a >> Bad Thing. >> > > Just answered on the other thread. A fork generally involves 2 branches.... > If we had apps.meego.com and apps.formeego.org then that would be a fork. > Moving apps.meego.com to apps.formeego.org... that's not a fork > I think it is a fork and I address why below. > > But if they do not stand up for developers creating apps for GNU/Linux >> distros, >> who will? > > > I have to say that I don't expect to see "We volunteer to throw ourselves > under a lawsuit to defend your rights to an OSS App store" anywhere on the > LF website. I'd be interested to know why you think they should do that? But it is the Linux Foundation that enforces the Linux trademark owned by Linus, no? Don't they have an obligation to protect Linux and its ecosystem? I think they do. > > How can the LF be scared of lawsuits? What happened to that giant trove of >> patents that IBM donated to Open Source? I'm sorry, I'm not buying it. >> > > No idea. Ask the LF. You do follow sites like Groklaw at least a little > bit? You know that in the US it can costs millions of $ to simply defend a > law suite? You know that's what you're fighting for when you fight against > SW patents? So to me it's blindingly obvious why an organisation would think > *very* hard about exposing themselves to that risk. > Which is all the more reason we need the combined patent pool and litigious might of the backers of the LF to fight software patents. The problem is not going to go away if groups like the LF avoid the fight, they are complicit. Besides, the tide is surely turning in our direction, the Bilsky ruling is an indication of that. > > Of course, they should also think *very* hard about just what services they > can reasonably offer the community and maybe figure out how to help resolve > the problem they've created. > > > The question this raises for me is : is LF a suitable host for the >> MeeGo >> community. >> >> >> If you think that MeeGo is going to somehow magically escape the clutches >> of the >> LF you need to "take a deep breath." They're not even going to provide an >> rsync >> server for the repos: >> https://bugs.meego.com/show_**bug.cgi?id=19745<https://bugs.meego.com/show_bug.cgi?id=19745> >> > > Again you conflate LF with "the community" I don't, on the contrary. I think that they are distinct entities and the LF has no interest in the community. This makes the answer to your question if the LF a suitable host for the MeeGo community simple; no. But how are you going to get the software to build your apps? If you have a separate OBS, with separate packages, a separate kernel, hooks for separate BSPs, and a separate community then you're not really MeeGo, you're a fork. > Total red herring Linux != OSS Apps. >> >> Totally not. There is no proprietary code in the GNU userland either. >> > > So... you realise we're talking about something like Maemo Extras? Thomas seems to be talking about something more extensive; "The images hosted there are built from packages hosted on MeeGo (C)OBS. They are community hardware adaptations for MeeGo." > > > Which BTW, is why a non-profit, managed by "the community" may be a better > place for our community services to be hosted. > >> >> And yet you've decided to create your own app store with the trademarked >> term >> "MeeGo" in the name! >> > > Yes. See the bug already mentioned. Apparently "formeego.org" is OK. Well that is good news. I can't escape the feeling that formeego is a fork aimed at not just creating ARM based MeeGo distros and creating x86 apps but also welcoming with open arms those who are unhappy with the current MeeGo "community." Am I totally wrong? Regards, Jeremiah
_______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list MeeGo-dev@meego.com http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev http://wiki.meego.com/Mailing_list_guidelines
