[rms at gnu.org: Some problems on gnucash.org]

[Thomas Bushnell BSG]

Derek Atkins <warlord at MIT.EDU> 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