Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Fedora Changing its Project Mission

posted by on Wednesday April 19 2017, @07:39AM   Printer-friendly
from the Free-as-in-TANSTAAFL dept.

An Anonymous Coward writes:

Fedora is drafting a new mission statement. The new initial proposal:

Fedora creates an innovative platform that lights up hardware, clouds, and containers for software developers and community members to build tailored solutions for their users.

The original goal was:

to work with the Linux community to build a complete, general purpose operating system exclusively from open source software.

Is saying open, or free, openly (excuse the pun) becoming something to be ashamed of? Are project ditching their ideals? Fedora barely mentioned free (or Free, to be more clear), but now it's even more vague. It's like if had to be reminded over and over to those in charge, as the triggered thread demostrates.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Fedora Changing its Project Mission | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 80 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 19 2017, @07:53AM (6 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 19 2017, @07:53AM (#496180)

    Modded Troll for Truth.

    “Won't programmers starve?”

          I could answer that nobody is forced to be a programmer. Most of us
    cannot manage to get any money for standing on the street and making
    faces. But we are not, as a result, condemned to spend our lives
    standing on the street making faces, and starving. We do something
    else.

    You delusional open source morons don't even know the history of your own movement.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Total Score:   1  

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 19 2017, @07:57AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 19 2017, @07:57AM (#496183)

    Continued:

    ...
    but that is the wrong answer because it accepts the questioner's implicit assumption: that without ownership of software, programmers cannot possibly be paid a cent. Supposedly it is all or nothing.

    The real reason programmers will not starve is that it will still be possible for them to get paid for programming; just not paid as much as now.

    Restricting copying is not the only basis for business in software. It is the most common basis(7) because it brings in the most money. If it were prohibited, or rejected by the customer, software business would move to other bases of organization which are now used less often. There are always numerous ways to organize any kind of business.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 19 2017, @08:03AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 19 2017, @08:03AM (#496185)

      Suppose everyone who buys a computer has to pay x percent of the price as a software tax. The government gives this to an agency like the NSF to spend on software development.

      We can quote scripture all night, idiot.

  • (Score: 2) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Wednesday April 19 2017, @08:03AM (2 children)

    by Scruffy Beard 2 (6030) on Wednesday April 19 2017, @08:03AM (#496186)

    You delusional open source morons don't even know the history of your own movement.

    AC may be surprised to learn that Richard M. Stallman agrees with them on that point:
    Why Open Source misses the point of Free Software [gnu.org]

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 19 2017, @08:13AM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 19 2017, @08:13AM (#496191)

      Open source is business terminology for exploiting the free labor of idealist hippies.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 20 2017, @02:31AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 20 2017, @02:31AM (#496666)

        it can be but it doesn't have to be. you're one of those slaveware users/peddlers who like to say "commercial" instead of "closed source" or "slaveware" as if F/OSS can't be commercial. you're just a common street hooker. just admit it.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 19 2017, @05:38PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 19 2017, @05:38PM (#496437)

    What does RMS have to do with "open source"? Nothing. There was also nothing wrong with what he said.