gnucash on alpha
There is a Debian maintainer with an alpha machine who can install the gnucash build dependencies in a chroot on his machine. Since gnucash fails utterly on alpha (with a crash as soon as a register is opened) this seems worth investigating. I don't have time in the near future. Is there a developer here who is willing? I can put you in touch with the alpha-owner. Thomas ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Some problems on gnucash.org]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Thomas Bushnell BSG schrieb: > Let's just make the website modifications because this will help us > maintain peace. If RMS makes a truly unreasonable demand in the > future, we can address that then. But the current request poses no > real problems, and so in the interests of comity, I suggest we take > it up, but without saying that we are doing so in response to his > message. *sigh* Thank you very much for this very clear explanation. Obviously it's in our and GnuCash's best interest to do as you proposed, so as normal grown-ups we just do it and move on. :-) For the website text changes, this would result in the attached patch to index.html. Note we don't have to be considerate of any translations, because no language except German (by myself) has a translation of the sentence in question anyway. As for the logo, someone with access to the source of the gnucash_logo1.png should replace the text accordingly and upload it. As for Linux->GNU/Linux, this only concerned some old announcements anyway, and obviously nobody really cares about the details of old announcements, so I've already changed that. What do the other developers think? Christian -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQCVAwUBRNxKpWXAi+BfhivFAQKfIQP/YJqTrB4GhTXJv5im80/i/BQL7zn8/gn4 +5evsuXRWsriNdtLPzSkMjzTLhRRU8HRyu9DEAvqbnlIHipit8UJMjW596iIlDcA 1nZkkOxQ8FX4ojX1d8eQK7DIEwylE3FUivIh/MTQU/Lxp0B4R4LI9TSU9SxZT/qb b6XDzw7KXuo= =3NRC -END PGP SIGNATURE- Index: index.phtml === --- index.phtml (revision 14639) +++ index.phtml (working copy) @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ - +http://www.gnu.org";>GNU Project.');?> ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Some problems on gnucash.org]
Christian Stimming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am Fri, 11 Aug 2006 11:15:17 +0200: > As for the logo, someone with access to the > source of the gnucash_logo1.png should replace the text accordingly > and upload it. Maybe the new logo could at the same time also be added to http://www.gnucash.org/promote.phtml. The images there seem to be quite outdated. Manfred ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: gnucash on alpha
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 01:14:05AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > There is a Debian maintainer with an alpha machine who can install the > gnucash build dependencies in a chroot on his machine. Since gnucash > fails utterly on alpha (with a crash as soon as a register is opened) > this seems worth investigating. I don't have time in the near future. > > Is there a developer here who is willing? I can put you in touch with > the alpha-owner. > > Thomas Do you have a link to the stack trace? Maybe it's a long-shot, but since the symptom seems the same as the MacIntel problem, maybe the fix is the same: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=339489 -chris ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
[Josh Sled] Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Some problems on gnucash.org]
Forwarded at Josh's request. --- Begin Message --- [lists.gnucash.org and I are not on speaking terms at the moment; can you forward my personal delivery of this message to you to gnucash-devel on my behalf, please?] On Thu, 2006-08-10 at 19:49 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > It seems to me that this is a case where it is wise not to declare war > and wise not to declare marriage. War helps nobody, and marriage has > its risks too. I don't think it's constructive to frame the discussion this way. I also don't think RMS could usurp the project as you suggest, though it would be a annoying event. I do think it's in everyone's interests to sort out the questions of copyright of the source tree if it's different from what the files indicate presently. As for the original points: - I've hyperlinked "GNU" to gnu.org on the website. - I don't like using the overloaded word "Free", and prefer "Open Source". I defer to the concensus of other gnc-core on this. - The graphic sources, while not (yet) checked into the tree, are available for modification. -- ...jsled http://asynchronous.org/ - `a=jsled; b=asynchronous.org; echo [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part --- End Message --- ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Some problems on gnucash.org]
Josh Sled <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> It seems to me that this is a case where it is wise not to declare war >> and wise not to declare marriage. War helps nobody, and marriage has >> its risks too. > > I don't think it's constructive to frame the discussion this way. I don't see why; if you have a different way to frame it, great. > I also don't think RMS could usurp the project as you suggest, though it > would be a annoying event. I think you must have misread my message. You don't think he could say "so-and-so is the new official GnuCash maintainer" and produce a code fork? What impedes him from doing so? > I do think it's in everyone's interests to sort out the questions of > copyright of the source tree if it's different from what the files > indicate presently. Yes, that's certainly true. > - I don't like using the overloaded word "Free", and prefer "Open > Source". I defer to the concensus of other gnc-core on this. My point is that, in the interests of peace, it's ok not to get everything we or you want. Which is more important: avoiding a big giant fight with RMS, or not using a word that you think is too overloaded? Thomas ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: gnucash on alpha
Chris Shoemaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 01:14:05AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: >> >> There is a Debian maintainer with an alpha machine who can install the >> gnucash build dependencies in a chroot on his machine. Since gnucash >> fails utterly on alpha (with a crash as soon as a register is opened) >> this seems worth investigating. I don't have time in the near future. >> >> Is there a developer here who is willing? I can put you in touch with >> the alpha-owner. >> >> Thomas > > > Do you have a link to the stack trace? Maybe it's a long-shot, but > since the symptom seems the same as the MacIntel problem, maybe the > fix is the same: > > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=339489 A stack trace, such as it is, can be found at: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=378346 The bug does not seem to be the same; the Mac failure is a protection fault in libgnomecanvas, and the alpha failure is an assertion failure in garbage collection in libglib. Thomas ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: gnucash on alpha
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 12:32:27PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Chris Shoemaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 01:14:05AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > >> > >> There is a Debian maintainer with an alpha machine who can install the > >> gnucash build dependencies in a chroot on his machine. Since gnucash > >> fails utterly on alpha (with a crash as soon as a register is opened) > >> this seems worth investigating. I don't have time in the near future. > >> > >> Is there a developer here who is willing? I can put you in touch with > >> the alpha-owner. > >> > >> Thomas > > > > > > Do you have a link to the stack trace? Maybe it's a long-shot, but > > since the symptom seems the same as the MacIntel problem, maybe the > > fix is the same: > > > > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=339489 > > A stack trace, such as it is, can be found at: > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=378346 > > The bug does not seem to be the same; the Mac failure is a protection > fault in libgnomecanvas, and the alpha failure is > an assertion failure in garbage collection in libglib. #9 0x02000202403c in g_logv () from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 #10 0x020002024084 in g_log () from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 #11 0x020002024114 in g_assert_warning () from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 #12 0x020002ee5c40 in gail_tree_view_new () from /usr/lib/gtk-2.0/modules/libgail.so #13 0x02000201b59c in g_child_watch_add () from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 #14 0x020002018090 in g_main_context_dispatch () from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 #15 0x02000201c660 in g_main_context_check () from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 #16 0x02000201cb94 in g_main_loop_run () from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 #17 0x0200014ed088 in gtk_main () from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 #18 0x0238abc8 in gnc_ui_start_event_loop () from /usr/lib/gnucash/gnucash/libgncmod-gnome-utils.so.0 That's probably not a bug in GnuCash - more likely libgail. I'd recommend filing it against libgail. -chris ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Some problems on gnucash.org]
Quoting Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> I also don't think RMS could usurp the project as you suggest, though it >> would be a annoying event. > > I think you must have misread my message. You don't think he could > say "so-and-so is the new official GnuCash maintainer" and produce a > code fork? What impedes him from doing so? Well, the fact that he doesn't control gnucash.org or any of the servers that run gnucash infrastructure I think would be a major impediment. Nothing would stop him from creating a fork, but I doubt anyone would follow there instead of using what comes from gnucash.org. It's not like RMS has any control over the current project. He can raise noise and be annoying, but from where I sit it's just hot air. Sure, he could remove the link from fsf.org or gnu.org. He could even point that link to a fork. *shrugs* I don't think that would change the membership of this list or what Red Hat, Debian, Gentoo, SuSE, etc include in their distributions. (Well, I'm assuming you wouldn't change what you did)... >> I do think it's in everyone's interests to sort out the questions of >> copyright of the source tree if it's different from what the files >> indicate presently. > > Yes, that's certainly true. > >> - I don't like using the overloaded word "Free", and prefer "Open >> Source". I defer to the concensus of other gnc-core on this. > > My point is that, in the interests of peace, it's ok not to get > everything we or you want. Which is more important: avoiding a big > giant fight with RMS, or not using a word that you think is too > overloaded? I think the proper response to RMS is "thank you for your concern. We've added the link to gnu.org." And just leave it at that. I don't think we should even mention the "Free" vs. "Open Source" in a reply. I do think, however, that $title should match the text in the graphics. I also think that we should not change the graphics until 2.2, which implies that I do not think we should change the text until 2.2.. And even then I don't know if we should.. -derek -- Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH [EMAIL PROTECTED]PGP key available ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: gnucash on alpha
Here is a list of the differences between a successful Debian build of gnucash for powerpc and for alpha. I have no idea which of these may be significant, but perhaps one of them will produce an "aha! that can't be right" from another developer. The only thing that leaps out at me is that the alpha build is including qthreads, and the powerpc build is not. This makes sense, because qthreads works on i386 and alpha, but not powerpc. Or perhaps qthreads doesn't actually work on alpha! Thomas build and host system type PowerPC: powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu Alpha: alphaev68-unknown-linux-gnu Maximum length of command line arguments: PowerPC: 32768 Alpha: 65536 Byteordering PowerPC: big endian Alpha: little endian qt_null PowerPC: Found in neither -lqthreads nor -lqt Alpha: Found in -lqthreads guile libraries: The same, except that Alpha has qthreads and pthread; PowerPC does not. g-wrap libraries The same, except that Alpha has qthreads, pthread, and ffi; PowerPC does not. _FILE_OFFSET_BITS for large files: PowerPC: 64 Alpha: none needed CFLAGS: Alpha has -mieee; PowerPC does not. ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Some problems on gnucash.org]
Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Well, the fact that he doesn't control gnucash.org or any of the > servers that run gnucash infrastructure I think would be a major > impediment. Nothing would stop him from creating a fork, but I > doubt anyone would follow there instead of using what comes from > gnucash.org. It sounds like you're saying "who cares if he starts a war; it will only do a little damage." I think this is short-sighted. Friendly relations with RMS are worth trying to keep. Of course, if he demands something unreasonable, then we may have to stand our ground and refuse. But I don't think the current request is unreasonable. It's worth bending on for the sake of peace. > I think the proper response to RMS is "thank you for your concern. > We've added the link to gnu.org." And just leave it at that. I > don't think we should even mention the "Free" vs. "Open Source" > in a reply. Well, I think independently that we should say "free". The term "open source" was, in fact, created as a deliberate attempt to slap RMS in the face, and I think he is rightly bothered by it. It is certainly not any clearer than "free software". The term by itself only denotes "you can look at the source"; it does not (by the grammar of the phrase) say anything about any freedoms. In addition, the OSI has certified patently non-free licenses as open source, making things worse. Thomas ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: gnucash on alpha
Quoting Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Chris Shoemaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 01:14:05AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: >>> >>> There is a Debian maintainer with an alpha machine who can install the >>> gnucash build dependencies in a chroot on his machine. Since gnucash >>> fails utterly on alpha (with a crash as soon as a register is opened) >>> this seems worth investigating. I don't have time in the near future. >>> >>> Is there a developer here who is willing? I can put you in touch with >>> the alpha-owner. >>> >>> Thomas >> >> >> Do you have a link to the stack trace? Maybe it's a long-shot, but >> since the symptom seems the same as the MacIntel problem, maybe the >> fix is the same: >> >> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=339489 > > A stack trace, such as it is, can be found at: > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=378346 > > The bug does not seem to be the same; the Mac failure is a protection > fault in libgnomecanvas, and the alpha failure is > an assertion failure in garbage collection in libglib. That stack trace would seem to imply a bug in libgail.. -derek -- Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH [EMAIL PROTECTED]PGP key available ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Some problems on gnucash.org]
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 05:16:32PM -0400, Chris Shoemaker wrote: > Hi Linas, > If we're talking about the same "standard" FSF assignment > form, it's designed to assign copyright of the entire existing > Work, not just future changes. That's why they require that the > Assigner(s) be sole copyright holder(s) for the Work. Was that > requirement met? I'm going to have trouble answering that, because that is not how I remember the assignments working. The way I remember/understood it was that the assignment simply allows the assignee to claim copyright. The code is essentially forked at that time, with the original author retaining copyright in one forked branch, and asignee is allowed to claim copyright on the other. Insofar as these two copies are the same, the net effect is that the original author retains copyright, and FSF can claim copyright as well. I do not remember any provisions for sole authorship. I am not a lawyer; the above is my recollection of what I thought I'd signed six years ago. > Robert Merkel claimed that no copyright had been assigned on > July 6, 2001. (His last contribution was in May, 2001.) Was that > true? I would have to dig through a file cabinet in the garage. Although different people signed these at different times, and some had to be nagged, I was under the impression that everyone signed them. But maybe not. > More to the point, if the FSF had been assigned copyright to > all of GnuCash in 2000, why did you and others continue to mark files > as copyright held by yourselves? Because that is my understanding of how the assignment works. > The whole thing seems very messy, > especially since GnuCash has been actively developed since then by > developers that never signed an assignment contract. Why should this matter? > I'm pretty confused by the implication that FSF became the > copyright holder for GnuCash in 2000, They would not be the sole copyright holder, they would be one among many. There are maybe 20 or 30 or more copyright holders, depending on how you wish to treat small patches. The only copyright concern I have is that I remember catching a certain Gnumatic employee going through the files fairly systematically, removing older copyright notices, and placing thier name in instead. This is a major violation as far as I'm concerned. I beleive I caught this early, and put a stop to it; I am not sure if all files were restored to thier original condition. On the other hand, another employee, Rob Browning, systematically failed to add his name to the files he authored, even after being asked repeatedly to do so. Funny how that goes. --linas ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: r14588 - gnucash/trunk - Remove the majority of the remaining deprecated widgets by collapsing
Am Mittwoch, 2. August 2006 20:13 schrieb David Hampton: > Author: hampton > Date: 2006-08-02 14:13:30 -0400 (Wed, 02 Aug 2006) > New Revision: 14588 > Trac: http://svn.gnucash.org/trac/changeset/14588 > > Modified: >gnucash/trunk/src/import-export/import-backend.c >gnucash/trunk/src/import-export/import-backend.h >gnucash/trunk/src/import-export/import-main-matcher.c >gnucash/trunk/src/import-export/import-match-picker.c >gnucash/trunk/src/import-export/import-provider-format.glade > Log: > Remove the majority of the remaining deprecated widgets by collapsing > the "deprecated-cleanup" branch (r13935:14581) back into trunk. Did these changes also change the behaviour of the "import-main-matcher" so that clicking on the "action" column requires a double-click now instead of a single-click? I'm referring to the place where one chooses either the to-be-reconciled existing transaction, or the target account for a new transaction. The change from single-click to double-click is quite surprising. Are there technical reasons that require this change? If yes, then it would have to be documented clearly in multiple places, or otherwise everyone using this regularly will be very confused at the next upgrade. Christian ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Some problems on gnucash.org]
On Aug 11, 2006, at 1:13 PM, Linas Vepstas wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 05:16:32PM -0400, Chris Shoemaker wrote: >> Hi Linas, >> If we're talking about the same "standard" FSF assignment >> form, it's designed to assign copyright of the entire existing >> Work, not just future changes. That's why they require that the >> Assigner(s) be sole copyright holder(s) for the Work. Was that >> requirement met? > > I'm going to have trouble answering that, because that is not how > I remember the assignments working. The way I remember/understood it > was that the assignment simply allows the assignee to claim copyright. > The code is essentially forked at that time, with the original author > retaining copyright in one forked branch, and asignee is allowed to > claim copyright on the other. Insofar as these two copies are the > same, the net effect is that the original author retains copyright, > and FSF can claim copyright as well. I do not remember any > provisions for sole authorship. > > I am not a lawyer; the above is my recollection of what I thought > I'd signed six years ago. Your recollection is accurate. The "assignment" of copyright is so that a single entity can defend the code in the event that the work needs protection. That way individuals do not have to be hunted down and asked to do so. The deal on assigning work to the FSF is that you as the individual that did the work still retain copyright over the work, but you have also given copyright to the Free Software Foundation as well. The sole authorship stuff is prove that the person that is doing the assignment really has the right to do so. Say I work for Foomatic, Corp and I signed a document on employment saying ALL code I write while employed at Foomatic, Corp belongs to Foomatic, Corp. Then in my spare time I decide to start helping the OpenCash project. They ask me to assign my work to Open Foundation. I gladly do so. Problem is that I do not own the code I am writing Foomatic does. Basically you have to acknowledge (via disclaimer) that no one else can make claims to your work before assign copyright to FSF. >> Robert Merkel claimed that no copyright had been assigned on >> July 6, 2001. (His last contribution was in May, 2001.) Was that >> true? > > I would have to dig through a file cabinet in the garage. Although > different people signed these at different times, and some had to be > nagged, I was under the impression that everyone signed them. But > maybe not. The Free Software Foundation also keeps these on file. >> More to the point, if the FSF had been assigned copyright to >> all of GnuCash in 2000, why did you and others continue to mark files >> as copyright held by yourselves? > > Because that is my understanding of how the assignment works. Technically those others still also hold copyright so there is nothing inherently wrong with it. However, it may have made more sense to put copyright of FSF. >> >> The whole thing seems very messy, >> especially since GnuCash has been actively developed since then by >> developers that never signed an assignment contract. > > Why should this matter? Im with Linas on how does that affect prior assignment. It simply means that code added by these developers is not assigned and should GNUCash want to change its license or defend its copyright in court it would have to get the blessing of these individuals separately. >> I'm pretty confused by the implication that FSF became the >> copyright holder for GnuCash in 2000, > > They would not be the sole copyright holder, they would be one among > many. There are maybe 20 or 30 or more copyright holders, depending > on how you wish to treat small patches. > The FSF likes to have small patches put in public domain so that there is no issue of copyright. Anything large they prefer assignment. In this case, of course, there was not assignment so it puts things in a messy state of dealing with each copyright holder individually. > The only copyright concern I have is that I remember catching a > certain > Gnumatic employee going through the files fairly systematically, > removing older copyright notices, and placing thier name in instead. > This is a major violation as far as I'm concerned. I beleive I caught > this early, and put a stop to it; I am not sure if all files were > restored to thier original condition. On the other hand, another > employee, Rob Browning, systematically failed to add his name to > the files he authored, even after being asked repeatedly to do so. > Funny how that goes. I strongly suggest that this project do copyright assignment. If not with the FSF then form your own entity (foundation or whatever) and assign the copyright to that entity. From a legal stand point having to wrangle 30 to 40 people to protect a copyright violation, change a license or any such thing is going to be a logistical nightmar
Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Some problems on gnucash.org]
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 05:39:31PM -0400, Chris Shoemaker wrote: > > AFAIK, neither GnuCash documentation nor GnuCash developers > have ever (publicly) claimed to be part of either Project, despite the > fact that such relationships would seem natural to some. Hmm. As the author of what I beleive is still a rather large chunk of the GnuCash code, I'll say it now. I participated in the founding of the Gnome Foundation, re-wrote and criticized several drafts of the charter. Voted in the elections for years. I never sought office in the Gnome Foundation, although I nominated Leslie, the PR person, to the board, a position which she got on the second try. As to the FSF: I've worked the FSF booth at trade shows, I've presented myself as an FSF representative in conversations with a company that was thinking of opening up thier Visual Basic macros (woo hoo). I've shared beers with... well, I'm not sure who, but they were FSF leadership, and I know I had fun. (Have they ever paid me money? No. Not even a stinkin free t-shirt? No. I wish. Skinflints.) --linas ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Some problems on gnucash.org]
Quoting Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Well, the fact that he doesn't control gnucash.org or any of the >> servers that run gnucash infrastructure I think would be a major >> impediment. Nothing would stop him from creating a fork, but I >> doubt anyone would follow there instead of using what comes from >> gnucash.org. > > It sounds like you're saying "who cares if he starts a war; it will > only do a little damage." I don't see it as a war. I see it as a tantrum. > I think this is short-sighted. Friendly relations with RMS are worth > trying to keep. Of course, if he demands something unreasonable, > then we may have to stand our ground and refuse. But I don't think > the current request is unreasonable. It's worth bending on for the > sake of peace. No, I'm saying "if he's going to act like a 6-year old just treat him as such". When a child has a tantrum usually the best thing to do is let them have the tantrum and eventually they will tire themselves out, stop crying, and move on with life. I look at this in the same manner. I agree that it's worth bending, some, and I've already suggested that. However I don't agree that we should jump at any request RMS makes. >> I think the proper response to RMS is "thank you for your concern. >> We've added the link to gnu.org." And just leave it at that. I >> don't think we should even mention the "Free" vs. "Open Source" >> in a reply. > > Well, I think independently that we should say "free". We already say that. GnuCash is personal and small-business financial-accounting software, freely licensed under the GNU GPL and available for GNU/Linux, *BSD, Solaris and Mac OSX. > The term "open source" was, in fact, created as a deliberate attempt > to slap RMS in the face, and I think he is rightly bothered by it. > It is certainly not any clearer than "free software". The term by > itself only denotes "you can look at the source"; it does not (by the > grammar of the phrase) say anything about any freedoms. > > In addition, the OSI has certified patently non-free licenses as open > source, making things worse. So? We're not the OSI. > Thomas -derek -- Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH [EMAIL PROTECTED]PGP key available ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
