There is currently a mutiny going on within the GNU project. Some people are breaking away to fork parts of GNU. I won't mention it by name, or link it, because I don't want to boost it.

If you see it: it's *not* the GNU project. Keep supporting GNU, on !

· · Web · 4 · 9 · 24

@libreleah I'm against the demonification of rms and that goofball letter, but people within #gnu getting out from under the staffed nonprofit and self-organizing is a positive development, in my mind.

@alrs @libreleah

Yes. The use of the GNU "brand" for that is weird though. It somehow reveals there's something off with the intentions. Something similar happened at GNU when RMS resigned from the FSF back in 2019 iirc. It was just noise. Anyway, we'll be seeing how far this gets and in what shape.

@tagomago @alrs

my hunch is that it's a coup, and very dangerous, but i could be wrong. i'm now lurking in their irc channel

i've made my objections known

@libreleah @tagomago To me the only "danger" in any of this is the FSF corporate nonprofit entity getting hijacked and winding up with a defanged MIT-equivalent GPL4. Hopefully #rms finds a legal structure to park the GPL in perpetuity.

@alrs @libreleah @tagomago
GNU branding up until recently has been a fairly reliable mark of gold standard open-source software, not necessarily user-friendly but functional and adaptable. Hopefully that branding won't be tainted by anti-meritocratic ideological stunting, like the Linux brand is right now.

@alrs @libreleah @tagomago can't the copyright holders of libre software "park" their code to GPLv3 and drop the + from GPLv3+, like Torvalds did with GPLv2? But a corrupt FSF would be detrimental to the enforcement of "older" GPL versions, I guess

@alrs @libreleah @tagomago I bet the GPLv3 drafters have covered that somewhere.. Indeed section 14 talks about it.

> If the Program specifies that a proxy can decide which future versions of the GNU General Public License can be used, that proxy's public statement of acceptance of a version permanently authorizes you to choose that version for the Program.

Perhaps that proxy is FSF for a number of projects. For individual projects, perhaps people should just choose that proxy as themselves.

@vu3rdd @libreleah @tagomago what I imagine to be tricky is the creation of an immutable legal entity that in pseudocode is the function NewGPLAvailable() {return false} out into forever.

@libreleah I've always thought the scenario was strange, while it's easy to understand a distaste for RMS it's not clear why people who genuinely agree with the GNU mission would compromise organizational stature by acting as they have.

It seems to me like the more positive thing to do would be to re-examine one's principles and from there either suggest smaller, more practical changes or to use those principles as a guide to properly branch off of the GNU project. If there's really something valuable in a fork I'd rather people stand up for that than to compromise their own work. Do they believe that their principles wouldn't be accepted in the organization as-is? Why not?

Somewhat considering reading up on some of the people involved and try to figure out what they think. I am years tired of the fractionalism in this field and it seems to be getting worse over time, not better.
@libreleah so what's wrong with forking of free software? this is one of the basic rights that GPL stands for.
there's no 'only one true way'. and programmers may not share the prospects that GNU as an organization may impose.
Sign in to participate in the conversation

Hello! is a general-topic, mainly English-speaking instance. We're enthusiastic about Mastodon and aim to run a fast, up-to-date and fun Mastodon instance.