Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Apple Businesses

Fink Maintainer Steps Down Due To GPL Infringment 260

Posted by CmdrTaco from the dirty-rotten-mac-os-x-users dept.
DShadow noted that the Fink maintainer Christoph Pfisterer has resigned largely because of GPL violations by openosx and macgimp, as well as macosx.forked.net. There's definitely some tension between the mac world and the Open Source and GPL worlds. Certain amounts of culture clash are inevitable, but hopefully great projects like this will continue, and commercial vendors will be able to play nice without alienating developers. The good news for Macheads is that fink will continue just fine.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Fink Maintainer Steps Down Due To GPL Infringment More

Fink Maintainer Steps Down Due To GPL Infringment

Comments Filter:
  • The message by Christoph Pfisterer when he resigned is something that I think anyone working on a project feels. Even for you slashdotters who don't always read the articles, read the email. Damn users who think they own you.
    I wish him luck in his future dealings:)

  • gpl community (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jrs 1 ( 536357 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @06:16PM (#2566394) Homepage
    the gpl's there for a reason - it's a community effort and you can't take from the community and not give back. i don't think resignation's the answer - how about fixing some of the problems instead? if you exit the game, you loose by default - keep playing!

    • Re:gpl community (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Derek ( 1525 )
      It sounds like his resignation goes a lot deeper than simple GPL violations. Sounds like "the community" he is involved with is less than appreciative. His feelings of frustration are understandable. I hope these experiences don't scar his attitude permamnently, good hackers are rare breed.

      -Derek

    • Re:gpl community (Score:4, Insightful)

      by spongman ( 182339 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @07:17PM (#2566713)
      the main problem is that the community in general does nothing but take and in reality only a few individuals actually do the giving.

      taanstafl.

      • There will always be more people who take than give, in any community. Many people don't have the skills to give, and some people will just mooch no matter what.

        One solution is to make sure anyone taking has already given, like I'm told some BBS's used to do.

        The solution the free software community uses is ignoring the problem and shooing away the obnoxious takers. Which really isn't as bad a solution as it sounds - the thousands of quiet takers aren't usually a problem. The people who are problems are the ones who loudly demand support and the like, and you can usually tell them to get lost and add them to your killfile.
        • One solution is to make sure anyone taking has already given, like I'm told some BBS's used to do.
          Alright!

          In other words, attach a value to effort? Something that can be tangibly counted and traded.

          I believe that's that the rest of the economic world is already doing: money for a day's work.

      • ITYM tanstaafl.

        It's always going to be the case that most of the work gets done by relatively few people, because learning enough about a particular project to be able to contribute meaningfully is difficult.

        IMHO, developers can ask their users to provide polite, relevant bug reports, and expecting any more than that is wishful thinking.

      • Re:gpl community (Score:2, Insightful)

        by ChuyMatt ( 318775 )
        This is especially true with the fact that it has been a development platform for GPLd Software for all of a year, really. It makes since that the first projects to be visible will have little feedback, the community doesn't know any better. Maybe this will highlight what is really not acceptable in GPL circles. This is a process that will take a while to make the difference. Hold on. Both on the development and the user side. Learn why things are done the way they are.
        What OS X did was thrust the Mac community into opensource and not the other way around. They are a, for the most part, a bit clueless. Help them along, while arrogant, they are still ours.

    • Re:gpl community (Score:3, Insightful)

      by erat ( 2665 )
      I don't believe that resigning was an answer to anything. Afte reading his message on geocrawler, it seems that he's sick of a lot more than just Fink. I can't say I blame him, although reading some of his "evidence" links didn't exactly paint him in the most favorable light (even when I'm sick to death of people asking me dumb questions or making me justify every statement I make in a mail list, I try not to be as hostile as Chris was. Good grief, that guy has a MAJOR attitude problem).

      I think someone like him really should stay out of the "people" business and stick to working behind the scenes for someone else. That's an honest statement, and is not meant to be a flame. He just doesn't have what it takes to deal with the inevitable cluseless newbie. Some "have it", but some (like him) will never work out in that arena.

  • The GPL doesn't have an advertising clause (Score:5, Informative)

    by bhurt ( 1081 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @06:19PM (#2566408) Homepage

    It would be perfectly legal for me to grab a copy of the Linux source code, rip out all the credits as to who did what work, and release my new OS "Brianux". This would be reprehensible (and for the record, I have no intention of actually doing this, so save your flames)- but perfectly legal so long as I released the source.

    • Re:The GPL doesn't have an advertising clause (Score:5, Informative)

      by ryants ( 310088 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @06:28PM (#2566472)
      Well, there's no advertising clause, but there is this:
      2 a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change
      So you would be obligated to state in each of those files that you changed them, and when, which should make it easy for people to see what you did (and did not do).

      • Interesting point. It seems kind of vague, though. Perhaps they should spell out exactly what a "prominent" notice means. Does that mean that it should be at the very top of every source file? What about the application, since most people will never look at the source?
      • I believe that this is intended to prevent the opposite case. A "vendor" making modifications and then passing it off as "official." (And then probably acting (?) dumb when it breaks.)

        I don't think that there is any attempt in the GPL to preserve "credit." Of course, copyrights are maintained, but I didn't see anything in the emails about copyright notices being whacked out.

        Basically, I think that this guy is trying to enforce what he thinks the GPL means, not what it says.

        Not that this isn't an f-ed up situation, but I think it is tough luck.

        -Peter
    • legal, yes. ethical? no.

      I know I wouldn't purchase anything from a company that was found to do this.

      Let's face it, one of the few benefits of working on opensource projects is the kudos - if parasitical companies start coming along and ripping projects off in this way, it's going to have a pretty severe impact on the developers of the ripped-off projects.
      • Reading the links in the article, it seems that OpenOSX did everything correctly and didn't try to hide anything from its customers. But that was not enough for Christoph Pfisterer, he wanted OpenOSX to give more credit to himself on the website.

        With macosx.forked.net there seemed to be some real problems with GPL, but they at least seem to want to fix those problems.

        After reading all the material directly linked from the story, it seems to me that Christoph is the asshole here.
        • I don't know that anyone was being an asshole. I think that Chris P.'s work earns him a little better treatment than calling him an asshole as soon as he does something you don't like. I will say that after reading that email exchange, it seems like maybe he was/is suffering from a touch of project burnout. I don't think the OpenOSX guy was as unreasonable as Chris implies.
    • From the GPL [gnu.org]:

      1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty;...

      So yes, you could rip out all the comments as to who did what, but you are required to maintain the copyright notice which would include the developer's names. You can even rename it to Brianux, as long as you maintain that copyright notice, which would include Linus Torvalds, et. al.

    • Re:The GPL doesn't have an advertising clause (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Jason Earl ( 1894 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @06:38PM (#2566526) Homepage Journal

      Heck, at first Mandrake was nothing more than RedHat with KDE. They happily took RedHat's GPLed installer (and other features) and put Mandrake in where RedHat had been.

      That's Free Software.

      Now, it sounds to me like the people that these groups that were actually selling copies of this software should have been a little more careful about giving credit where credit was due if for no other reason than ticking off the primary developer is a bad deal.

      Now, the fact that forked.net wasn't providing source code along with their binaries, is a different story all together. The GPL does not guarantee that the original author will get credit, instead it guarantees that the end user gets source code. If you want credit then use a different license. Just remember that advertising clauses and the GPL don't mix, so you won't be able to use any GPLed source in your new product.


      • Now, it sounds to me like the people that these groups that were actually selling copies of this software should have been a little more careful about giving credit where credit was due if for no other reason than ticking off the primary developer is a bad deal.


        Having just read through the details of what happened here, I don't even see this point. The person selling the CDs wasn't actually aware that any credit was being missed out, and upon being informed of this problem, offered and in fact did rectify it. I think all of the problems here come down to a clash of personalities and the fink maintainer expecting his name up in lights or something, while the CD distributor (IMHO rightly) focussed the credit upon those who wrote the original program (ie GIMP) and only mentioned the porting efforts embodied in fink as a side reference.

  • If we were to steal their code we would most likely give them credit. They will not allow this, but they will still ours without giving credit to us. What a double standard...
    • it's not a double standard. it's a choice. the writers of fink and most other software projects make a choice as to what terms they want to license that software to users. fink, and lots of other people, choose to release it open source. others do not.
      a double standard would be for some projects to have that choice, and others not to.

  • Should Apple be involved? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by inkswamp ( 233692 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @06:22PM (#2566425)
    Someone on Macslash [macslash.com] commented that Apple should be financially backing these kinds of projects. I wonder what sort of effect that would have on this kind of thing.

    BTW, being a long-time Mac user myself, I'm totally clueless to how these kinds of open source issues are worked out, but I am curious about it. These kinds of issues can't be new. Can any of you more acquainted with this topic offer any sort of precedent for these kinds of issues/disputes?

    --Rick

    • Q: What is your relation with Apple? [sourceforge.net]
      A: Apple is aware of Fink and has started to support us as part of their Open Source relations efforts. So far they are providing us with pre-release seeds of new Mac OS X versions in the hope that Fink packages can be adapted in time for the release. Quote: "
      Hopefully it underscores the commitment that many suspect we're not willing to provide. We'll get better at the open source game over time." Thanks Apple!
    • Apple seems to be backing the other horse, Open Packages, though I see from a later post that they have helped the fink group.

      In the long run I think that OP is a more promising project, though one should never be too quick to dismiss the advantages of running code and an installed base.

  • Woooooah Nelly.... (Score:4, Informative)

    by cjsnell ( 5825 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @06:23PM (#2566428) Journal
    Before anyone starts bashing the macosx.forked.net guys, let's keep a few things in mind:

    1) There's nothing wrong with charging for access to files. You pay your ISP, right?

    2) Apex *is*, apparently, working to comply with the GPL. From what I've read in the past on his site, he works in the commercial fishing industry up in Alaska. I would imagine that his time to work on the site and the packages is limited.

    3) Apex has been very helpful in the past on the forums hosted on his server. Lots of people have requested ports of software (some of which are difficult) and he has come through for them.

    Chris
    • I don't think one should put down Apex generally, and I don't suspect real bad will behind his actions. But I also think it was pretty lame by him to pretend he did port all the software, when in fact a large subset of his packages were straight "ports" (or should I say: rip-offs?) of Fink packages. That in turn wouldn't be too bad, if he just gave credit where credit was due.
    • "Apex *is*, apparently, working to comply with the GPL. From what I've read in the past on his site, he works in the commercial fishing industry up in Alaska. I would imagine that his time to work on the site and the packages is limited. "

      Apparently you are not familiar with the Alaskan Commercial Fishing Industry - he probably has nine months of the year to work on it . (Actually he might be crabbing during the winter, but most of us put it three or four months of hard work doing dangerous shit (ie sleeping for 2 (or less) hours in 48 hours in the second most dangerous job in the US...), and then slack the rest of the year. (Of course if he's been commercial fishing these past couple of years, then he probably works the rest of the year to support his commercial fishing habit ).

      LetterRip

      • Actually...I am, a bit. I've read all of Spike Walker's books, which seem to be pretty accurate. I know that there is fishing (crabbing?) for king crab up in the Bering Sea during the winter. He might be working in a cannery or doing maintainence on boats. Who knows... I'm just going off of what I've read in his forums.

  • Attitude? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pbur ( 88030 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @06:23PM (#2566429)
    Ok, I read through the supplemental information and his attitute to the first guy posting to Sourceforge just seemed wrong. Not knowing this guy, he seems very abrasive and doesn't understand that not everyone is a freaking computer genious. Yes, people who don't read the manuals are annoying, but when you YELL at someone you are turning them off big time. Especially when it seems that the guy just downloaded an old version of mysql and there seems to be no indication that the new version is required. It really comes down to the fact I can't get over HIS USE OF SHOUTING in what seemed to be a normal civilized support request.

    Pbur

    • Re:Attitude? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Xerithane ( 13482 )
      Keep in mind, that he stated that they discussed it on the forked.net board and apex deleted the thread from the message board.

      You don't know what the discussion was like before then.
    • this guy actually seems like a clone of Theo DeRaadt. an abrasive asshole who insists on acting like a child. I'm sure he busts his ass doing the fink work but he really goes about all this the wrong way. you catch more flies with honey than with SULFURIC ACID.
    • "Yes, people who don't read the manuals are annoying, but when you YELL at someone you are turning them off big time."

      I would gladly piss off a dozen users who are too obnoxious to bother reading the manual as opposed to pissing off one developer who's spending the majority of his time working on a free software project.

      It seems to be a simple fact that running any sort of high profile project (software or otherwise) is an easy way to net yourself a world of shit. A vocal minority of users will bitch at the people in charge for anything and everything, even if the people are donating their time.

      I honestly don't know whether this guy was abbrasive to begin with or if the continual grief just eventually took its toll. All I can really say is that someone who (according to all accounts) was quite talented and willing to put in quite a bit of time into the project got fed up with dealing with crap that, ideally, he shouldn't have to deal with.

      • I would gladly piss off a dozen users who are too obnoxious to bother reading the manual

        Which is fine as long as the manual in question is usable. All too often in the open source world, the manual is useless unless you already know what you're doing. Apache and PHP do a good job of getting the user up and running quickly. MySQL does a very reasonable job as well. Too much software ignores that fact that spending five hours reading documentation just to get one thing to work is an extremely frustrating experience.

        Make the obvious stuff (the purpose for downloading the software) ridiculously easy to accomplish. Make the rest accessible. That will keep a lot of users off your back.

        - Scott
        • "Too much software ignores that fact that spending five hours reading documentation just to get one thing to work is an extremely frustrating experience."

          I certainly agree with you there. I suspect part of the problem is that spending time writing documentation usually doesn't serve to help scratch the "personal itch" that's generally considered the motivation behind free software. I suspect it also doesn't help that it's easy enough to consider the software as "still in development", allowing the developers to put off documentation indefinitely.

          Still, in the case of Fink, the documentation seems pretty straight-forward. Checking the Fink site [sourceforge.net], there are links for both documentation and a FAQ. The user's guide [sourceforge.net] seems to be pretty straightforward. It has a couple extra details in there (such as explaining the use of pico to edit the user's .cshrc), but it looks like an experienced user could pull out the important details in a few minutes (at most). The FAQ [sourceforge.net] looks like it does a decent job of picking up some of the more esoteric problems that're too detailed to clutter the manual.

          On the other hand, it's possible that the Fink user guide is a little too brief. It's hard to tell without a further understanding of exactly what the actual Fink software is beyond the Reader's Digest description of the project (porting Unix utilities over to OS X).

  • he needs to de-stress (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nehril ( 115874 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @06:28PM (#2566466)
    this fink maintainer (Christoph Pfisterer) really does need to get off the project, and onto some valium. reading the threads he posted after his rant one gets the impression that he is on a permanent caffeine-stress-hairtrigger high. jeez.

    The email exchange between him and the supposed gpl violators is a hoot. The very first response Christoph got from the company was "did we screw up? tell us how to give proper credit," and Christoph then proceeds to continue bashing and raving.

    It really sounds like christoph needs a major vacation, the stress seems to be breaking him. I don't know any of the people/orgs involved, but just read his rant and the links he posted at the bottom.
    • I agree -- after reading through all the messages, it certainly seems that Christoph is genuinely upset, but not about anything that anyone in particular has done.

      There are no GPL violations or real ethical lapses here, it just seems like maybe the community is too big for the kind of relationships he wants the developers and users to have.

      This is more of a "tragic on all sides" situation than a case of anyone doing something wrong.
    • this fink maintainer (Christoph Pfisterer) really does need to get off the project, and onto some valium. reading the threads he posted after his rant one gets the impression that he is on a permanent caffeine-stress-hairtrigger high. jeez.

      Agreed. Chris needs to take a break for awhile, then maybe come back with a lighter schedule.

    • I know what you mean. He even acts as if he created the packages, when the only thing he did was ported them.

      Sure, give credit where its due. But tell me something: do you know who is responsible for porting Linux to CRIS?

  • GPL: Law or Social Understanding? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dominion ( 3153 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @06:28PM (#2566469) Homepage
    Situations like this underscore the real strength (and weakness) of the GPL. The strength is that the GPL has worked so far without any large-scale legal challenge. There's a strong social understanding that comes with GPL'ed code, that you give back to the community from which you've taken.

    The weakness is that the GPL would probably lose in court, to some degree. This is because copyright law and, in many ways, the legal system, in the US and elsewhere, were never designed to work in accordance with the common good, especially when it comes to issues of property, and even moreso when it comes to the issues of intellectual property (really just an illusion of modern society).

    Therefore, when approaching breaches of the GPL, it's probably in our best interest, as a community, to not immediately threaten legal repurcussions, but instead work on other ways to pressure entities to abide by our community's standards.

    Any entity that uses GPL'ed code in bad faith ultimately will recieve a pretty bad reputation in the growing free software community. Also, if they're not willing to abide by our rules, what says that we should abide by theirs? For instance, if Microsoft rolls a bunch of GPL'd code into a new product, then we retain an ethical (if not legal) right to distribute the resulting binary of that product as much as we'd like.

    I didn't intend this post to be as long as it is, but basically, think about this: Do we see free software as a phenomenon? Something that just happened? Or as a movement? Something that we all made happen? If it's a phenomenon, then the best we can hope for is that the GPL sticks, on a legal basis. If it's a movement, then we're going to have to be prepared to come together and face challenges. So far, although a lot of us haven't acknowledged it, we've functioned as a movement, and we've been very successful. Witness the FUD that Microsoft used to spread about Linux. Our responses to that FUD ended up making MS look more like sore losers than better producers.

    Also consider that it's possible the struggle for collectively owned information and intellectual property may some day move far outside of the internet, and into the real world. That might require a whole new re-evaluation of our tactics and ideals.

    Okay, enough ranting.
    • The weakness is that the GPL would probably lose in court, to some degree.


      Well, the Lawyer for the Free Software Foundation says he enforces the GPL all the time by threatening to sue and companies always back down because the GPL is so easy to enforce. The point is that the GPL grants the customer rights that do not exist under standard copyright law. If you re-distribute a work based on someone else's copyrighted code and you then challenge the GPL then you are in for a big-time copyright violation. If the GPL is invalid, you had no right to the code in the first place!

    • Also consider that it's possible the struggle for collectively owned information and intellectual property may some day move far outside of the internet, and into the real world. That might require a whole new re-evaluation of our tactics and ideals.

      It already has. My involvement with Free software has already led me to protest about the actions of RiceTec Inc. [ricetec.com] who have patented Basmati rice!

      IMHO, Basmati rice is used by humanity under the terms of a GPL-like license (if it wasn't, why does it produce seeds (aka source code) that can be grown (compiled) to produce new rice?)

      Luckily, it looks as though, for once, the system came through and ruled that 75% of their claims were invalid [flora.org]

    • You say "the GPL would probably lose in court". Why? You don't claim to have any legal experience, and neither do I, but it seems odd that you'd make claims about probabilities.

      The GPL is based on the same theory that commerical software licenses are based on: we take a piece of software and copyright it (it's been clearly established that software is copyrightable; therefore there is not any sort of doubt as to whether GPL'd works are validly copyrighted). Since the work is copyrighted, we can require people who wish to copy the work to agree to our terms, whatever they are. We can require them to quack if we want.

      If the GPL is not a valid grant of copy license, realize that means the works cannot be distributed at all. It's impossible for copyrighted works to enter the public domain before expiration unless the copyright owner allows it. The GPL is clearly not a statement of public-domain intentions.

      If you violate the GPL and are sued, you can either admit that you agreed to the GPL or you can claim you didn't. If you did, we're out of copyright law (and so it doesn't matter what copyright law was designed for) and into contract law. In contract law, you largely don't have rights that you've agreed not to have; you agreed not to violate it when you agreed to it. If you claim you never agreed to the GPL, you're copying a copyrighted work without a license: old-fashioned copyright infringement. It doesn't even matter if the person who gave it to you in the first place violated the GPL and took the copyright notices off; it's still copyrighted (though the penalties would likely be smaller in that case). Copyright doesn't just magically disappear because someone uses it for something other than "you-give-me-money-I-give-you-software" material-world emulation.
    • The Free Software Foundation has persuaded numerous people to back off in the face of the GPL. The reason is simple - it is a license giving you EXTRA FREEDOMS over standard copyright restrictions and you can choose to abide by it or be taken to court under standard copyright legislation, which IS well tested.
      In giving you those extra freedoms, you have to accept the terms of the license. The GPL is not like a shrink wrapped license which restricts your freedom, you may only see after opening the package, and therefore may be legally invalid.

      If the GPL is held to be invalid the person who is breaking the GPL terms is guilty under standard copyright law, which carries very hefty penalties. The cleverness of the GPL is it is a catch-22, i.e. break the terms of it, and they can get you whether or not the GPL is valid.
    • The weakness is that the GPL would probably lose in court, to some degree. This is because copyright law and, in many ways, the legal system, in the US and elsewhere, were never designed to work in accordance with the common good, especially when it comes to issues of property, and even moreso when it comes to the issues of intellectual property (really just an illusion of modern society).

      Oh, what an excellent troll!
  • It looks like Chistopher is complaining about a few points, to which Jeshua replies and proves Chistopher wrong (i.e. "No where I have I taken credit for porting the software. Where is the word 'ported' mentioned?").

    I guess I miss Chistopher's argument, as Jeshua pretty much set him straight. Jeshua is also right. Chistopher knows nothing about Jeshua. Jeshua could be a huge OSS contributer in a bunch of other projects.

    Sounds like Chistopher is a crybaby and doesn't felt he got his way for some reason, so now he's quitting.

    If that's not it, what'd I miss?
    • I'll have to pore through the GPL tonight, but AFAIK there's no violation here...Christoph wants credit for porting, basically. AFAIK that's not required and for it to be required Christoph would have to slap on an advertising clause in his copy of the GPL, which would a.) be a violation of the GPL and b.) would require special permission from all the authors of said ported software.



      Eh, let him resign. Who needs crybabies?

  • Short Fuse (Score:3, Insightful)

    by nate1138 ( 325593 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @06:29PM (#2566476)
    I understand that this guy is working for free, But if you are not prepared to deal with users who need some help, why in the hell are you developing end-user software? I work as a developer, and idiotic questions make up about 20% of my average day. Read some of the email exchanges with openosx, and with users on sourceforge, and you may come away with the same impression I did, mainly that this dude has a real short fuse and nasty temper. Remember, he VOLUNTEERED to do this project, nobody was forcing it on him. If he doesn't like it, go start another project, or find a cushy commercial position (he's obviously talented enough to get paid some real money).
    • Well, my guess is that nobody would tolerate that in a commercial position. I mean, we all have our limits and we can all lose our tempers with a sufficient amount of stupidity thrust on us. But you can't go around losing your temper every time you get a dumb question from somebody who didn't RTFM. My favorite strategy is just to repeatedly refer them to the written material, or if they repeatedly refuse, to ignore their requests. This tends to make you more friends than just flaming away at everybody, and works in the corporate world too.

  • Sounds like a shareware author... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Zoop ( 59907 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @06:29PM (#2566477)
    The majority of this guy's decision to resign actually sounds like he's tired of dealing with what shareware and freeware authors have been dealing with for years, with only the good will of people to get any compensation or credit (most shareware on the Mac is not time-limited). The Mac community does have a high standard for software performance and does expect polish from its programmers.

    It results in a fair amount of whinery, but it sounds like this guy is going to be shocked when he finds that users in the professional world will be just as nasty, plus they'll threaten to withhold payment.

    The e-mail exchange didn't impress me a lot either--it sounded like he had one or two points that the guy was willing to concede on, but he blew up and brought other things into the mix for a flame-o-rama.

    So I'm sorry that he's no longer a Mac developer, and I'd encourage him to put his studies first. On the other hand, I'm not going to get too worried about the nature of the Mac community over it.
    • I agree with your assessment. He's whining about what everyone else in the industry has to put up with every day. I get the crap he's complaining about constantly.

      He needs to decompress and get back to his studies.
      • "He's whining about what everyone else in the industry has to put up with every day."

        I believe you mean: He's whining about what everyone else in the industry gets a paycheck for putting up with every day. Instead, this guy was volunteering his time and because of it, he was getting a bunch of extra shit he didn't want. We know beggars can't be choosers, but apparently philithranopists can't be, either.

        "Lead Developer of a Major Software Project" or whatever his equivilant corporate world title would be would probably be worth six figures and would include support staff. The free software world usually doesn't have the luxury of having other people responsible for handling testing and the like.

        • All well and good, but developers shouldn't get into Free Software without expecting thankless effort. If they expect that, when they do get thanks, it'll be all the more appreciated.

          OTOH users shouldn't get into it expecting polished customer service attitudes from all of the developers, all of the time. If they expect to be lambasted at every turn, then when they find someone who's extremely polite and helpful it will be very pleasant. I'm thinking of Muhri, lead developer of the Pronto mail client. He is the most helpful developer I have ever spoken to. Then again, I try to be a polite user.

          Best of all is if people can forget their roles of "user" and "developer" and just try and be partners in the whole game. We can dream.
    • This calls to mind the disjunct between the shareware camps around Wintel and Apple, on the one hand, and the libre community grown up around the OSS *nix on the other.

      Nomination for oxymoron of the month: Linux Shareware.

      While I think OSX is the smartest thing Jobs and Co. has done since the first consumer GUI, I don't think its automatic by any means. The coifed, turned-out designer in Buddy Holly specs gets onboard the BSD bus, scores beaucoup street cred, but has to sit next to that smelly, hairy unix guy. The Mac community will find performance in spades, but polish is not often a value. On the projects I'm familiar with, even the most professional, the response to obnoxious support demands goes: You didn't pay for it and I'm not paid to listen.

      You're more likely to be ignored, or firmly and politely (chrisp is an exception) invited to DIY and while you're at it send a patch.

  • His resignation say otherwise. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by victim ( 30647 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @06:31PM (#2566485)
    He lists the following reasons for resigning...
    • Tired of unappreciative people.
    • Tired of people who think they are owed immediate support.
    • Tired of being yelled at by above people.
    • Tired of people that complain about bugs but won't help fix. note: you do not need to be a coder to help fix. testers and analyzers are always handy
    • Tired of defending decisions.
    • Tired of people using the mailing list instead of the docs.
    • Tired of working with people that make money off of other peoples work without credit. here we get to some of the headline.
    • Tired of working with some specific offenders of the above.
    • Tired of spending every waking hour on fink.
    • repeat variations of the above some more...


    Sounds more like just plain tired than GPL violations, but then I'm not a slashdot media spinner.

    Christoph deserves a great big THANKS from the world of computer users. I have worked on similar ports to other processors and it is mind numbing tedious work that stretches to the horizon and beyond. Every day you know that you will spend it fixing bugs in a dozen programs, bugs that will range from the trivial to the near impossible to find.

    You do not plan and execute your plan as in the development of a program. You work your way down the list of unwashed packages, build them, test them, fix them and check them off only to find more packages added to the list than you checked off that day. Most of the packages you won't give a rat's ass about, but you do them because someone, somewhere will be wanting it.

    Take a break Christoph. Get caught up in school, then when that itch returns create another wonderful thing.
    • I'm an open source developer and have dealt with plenty of this with my own project [blueaspen.com]. I'd like to comment on a few of his reasons...

      * Tired of unappreciative people.

      Fact: most people don't give a flip about how much time you spent coding. Perhaps he should focus more on those who love his work (I'm one of those folks).

      * Tired of people who think they are owed immediate support.

      Procmail does wonders. If its happening on the mailing list, ignore it. If they keep persisting, kick them from the list.

      * Tired of being yelled at by above people.

      See above.

      * Tired of people that complain about bugs but won't help fix. note: you do not need to be a coder to help fix. testers and analyzers are always handy

      Hey, at least they are using the software. When I first started coding Bronc, I was grateful to receive so much as a flame from one of my users. At least people are paying attention!

      * Tired of defending decisions.

      Defending decisions? It's *his* software!! He doesn't have to defend a thing. If someone doesn't like it, they can fork his code and start their own project.

      * Tired of people using the mailing list instead of the docs.

      Welcome to free software, bro. :)

      * Tired of working with people that make money off of other peoples work without credit. here we get to some of the headline.

      You don't have to work with them. Sue them if you want. If you don't want to do that, you can always tweak your code to keep it from working with their product. :)

      * Tired of spending every waking hour on fink.

      I hear ya.

      Chris
    • > * Tired of people that complain about bugs but won't help fix

      There was a person on Linux Weekly News recently complaining that people wouldn't report bugs on his package. This is part of the reason why. I run across several bugs where I don't have the time or interest to deeply investigate. I can try to make a quick and clear bugreport, but why bother if all I'm going to get is crap for it, or it's just going to get ignored?
    • I've been following the open source software community for quite a while now, and prior to that, the shareware community.

      And I have seen lots of this before. A guy works hard and endless hours trying to perfect his code, his program becomes popular, and then not long after, the critics and flames come along. The writers of the software can't deal with the fact that newbies ask too many questions, or that (heaven forbid) someone decides to extoll his opinions on why the program in question sucks. The pressure mounts, the author gets frustrated and then he gives up and quits.

      This is not the way to do it. Like someone else mentioned, flames, critics, and newbies all mean that your program is popular. If it sucked, it wouldn't be popular. Some (not the majority) of open source software writers expect that if their program rocks, they'll be Linus Torvalds overnight. (This is where my habit of pessimism comes in handy.)

      Most open source programmers get their reward for their time and effort in knowing that their code is good, their code is useful, and people are using it. That's it, nothing more, nothing less.

      You take bug reports, you answer the polite questions (while ignoring the stupid ones), and you thank those who have helped out with testing or the code itself. If the flames get too rough, you just sit back and say to yourself, "Self, this is *my* program and *I* know it's good, so fuck everyone else."

      To this Christoph guy, if he reads Slashdot: While it is very unfortunate that the events you list above occured, you need to accept the fact that developing software in the public's eye comes with these downfalls. If you get into another project and begin to face the same problems, do yourself and the open source community a favor. Don't give up quite so easily the next time.
      • Better might be to give up more easily, while he still has some cool left. Then he could see if he could find an assistant to take over while he takes a break. Much better all around. And it would be easier to come back when he chose to.
    • Chrispy - I'm on your side.

      I love Fink - it's one of the reasons I love Mac OS X - it opens the world of UNIX apps to Mac users... I think it's shitty that others don't appreciate the hard work involved - but I think the other /.ers are right - shit happens - sounds like you need to take it a little less personally. And this post is right on - take a break and get back into it when the time is right.

      GREAT WORK..... I use it every day!

  • I dunno... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by update() ( 217397 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @06:31PM (#2566486) Homepage
    There's definitely some tension between the mac world and the Open Source and GPL worlds. Certain amounts of culture clash are inevitable...

    There's certainly some clashing between the Mac and Unix worlds (the iTunes installer issue was probably caused by that kind of mutual ignorance) but Apple and proprietary developers have generally gotten along well with the BSD and gcc people as far as license issues go.

    The problems described here don't strike me as being a Mac vs free software conflict. They sound a lot more like the stuff Linux developers have been dealing with for the last few years -- LinuxOne-style abuse of redistribution and self-absorbed users who think that because you gave them something you work for them.

    • Re:I dunno... (Score:4, Informative)

      by Samrobb ( 12731 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @10:39PM (#2567221) Journal
      Apple and proprietary developers have generally gotten along well with the BSD and gcc people as far as license issues go.

      What?

      Recently, maybe, but take a look at this link [www.desy.de] to a copy of the 1993 g++ FAQ:

      Because the legal policies of Apple threaten the long-term goals of FSF, as well as the concept of free software, no support will be lent to efforts to port GNU software to Macintosh or other Apple hardware.

      The FSF didn't end the boycott of Apple until 1995, and even then, they pretty much said [helsinki.fi] that unless supporting MacOS was ridiculously easy, they wouldn't bother accepting patches because that might impact their effort to produce the "GNU operating system".

      If you want a quick summary of the boycott, the reasons, and how the FSF eventually "forgave" Apple the same way he "forgave" KDE [linuxtoday.com], you can check out this link [isu.edu]. Frankly, I'm surprised that the FSF and Apple are managing to get along as well as they are; it speaks volumes about Apple's commitment, and about the way the FSF has matured over the years, as well.

      • > the way the FSF has matured over the years

        What do you mean? Apple was following a course of action (a look-and-feel suit), that if it had been upheld in court, could have meant the end of a lot of free software. A lot free software has the look and feel of some other software, ranging from the Unix look and feel to trying to emulate some proprietary application. The FSF was almost obliged to take action, and I fail to understand why you think a boycott is immature.

        Also, I don't they've changed much over the years. GNU/FSF software doesn't usually support Mac (pre-OSX) out of the box. It usually supports Mac OS/X as just another Unix. And the support is almost invariably added by a non-FSF person.

  • Weenies (Score:2, Flamebait)

    by Large Green Mallard ( 31462 )
    Christoph Pfisterer seems like quite the weenie from his email exchange. OpenOSX is just trying to make things easier for people. It's not like they've gone out of their way to anonomize Fink and change its name.

    Are the creators of RPMs forced to give credit to the writers of bash or csh because their programs use these languages to run post/preinstall scripts? Of course not. If you're just using a program to install another program, and the installer program is based on the GPL, don't be expecting to get damn credits all over the packaging.

    In the email exchange posted by Christoph Pfisterer (no less), Josha looks like he's being quite reasonable and that it's actually Christoph Pfisterer being a pillock.

  • More on MacSlash (Score:3, Informative)

    by acaben ( 80896 ) <bstanfieldNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @06:38PM (#2566528)
    You can also read about this [macslash.com] story on MacSlash [macslash.com], which published the story first. We've got some good discussion going on over there, and lots of people jumping in the fray on both sides of Chrisp.

    Personally, I'm sad to see him go, but hope he'll be back eventually. I understand his frustration with the "community" but hope he notices all of us who forgot to say how much we appreciated his work before he left.

    I think I'm gonna' make a bumper sticker: "Have you hugged an Open Source Programmer today?"

  • Overworked and burned out... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Amokscience ( 86909 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @06:38PM (#2566530) Homepage
    Sounds like something I read recently:

    http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue4_10/bezro uk ov/

    (section: "Cult of Personality, burnout of the leader")

    As a maintainer of my own growing project on sourceforge I often emphathize with the items listed in this paper. Some people have a tendency to put an enormous amount of pressure on themselves. When this happens you naturally become very defensive and intolerant. This is probably lessened when you have a strong core group.

    Time to take a vacation.

  • I shouldn't have been so slack ... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Strepsil ( 75641 ) <mike@bremensaki.com> on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @06:41PM (#2566543) Homepage
    Over the last two days, I've set up a couple of new Macs at work, and used Fink to throw all the extra goodies that I needed on. Ever since I started playing with it around 0.20 time, I've found the whole distribution to be wonderful.

    I really meant to post a "thank you" note at some point. I wish I had. I can't possibly account for how much time the Fink people have saved me.

    OK - from reading the background material, I think that Christoph has made some dubious assumptions about people at times, and attacked people a little too eagerly - but these are really just symptoms of someone working way too hard for too little reward. I get like that at work sometimes.

    How about we all take a little bit of time today to send out a simple "thanks" email to one person involved with one piece of free software that you use regularly. It'll only take a minute or so, and may just keep that person feeling good enough about doing what they're doing that they'll keep on doing it.

    Just go and do it now. Slashdot will still be here when you get back.
    • Ok,

      anyone have linus's or Alan Cox's email addresses?

      I should actualy send them each a case of beer for all that linux has done for me.
    • It's not just programmers. When was the last time *anyone* thanked the people behind Slashdot or OSDN or VA (big target!) or Slashcode? (I did, today. :)

      Really, if people were more inclined to spread praise where it's deserved, it would be easier to deal with legitimate gripes and to dismiss the random whining that's going around these days.

  • I dont know all of the specifics, but by reading through the supporting materials listed by Christoph Pfisterer in his resignation, it seems to me that he has at many points actively engaged in flaming people on the various support boards for their ignorance.. sure its not all him, but he's doing just as much flaming as any of the people he's complaining about..

  • Title is false; make up your own minds (Score:5, Informative)

    by rsfinn ( 140348 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @06:53PM (#2566600)
    There is no evidence of any real GPL infringement here. I urge SlashDot readers, especially the kneejerk "GPL good, Apple bad" crowd, to read the conversations at the indicated links and make up their own minds:

    1) OpenOSX appears to be distributing source code on their CDs, and now gives credit to fink on the MacGIMP CD web page.

    2) Macosx.forked.net has also posted credit to fink on the home page web site, as well as indicating their intention to address GPL issues.

    Apparently Pfisterer is irritated in part because they were slow to give fink credit; but as others have pointed out, that's not a GPL violation.

    Following the other links he includes in his "resignation letter" suggests that he's quick to get irritated -- especially when people point this out to him (cf. the "abiword" thread). Perhaps there are other things going on in his life, and this isn't a good time for him to lead an open-source project. Fine. Kudos to him for leaving his ball behind instead of taking it with him.

    But the article title ("Fink Maintainer Steps Down Due To GPL Infringment") is misleading at best. Even Pfisterer didn't make this claim.

  • Bogus Claims (Score:3, Insightful)

    by augustz ( 18082 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @06:59PM (#2566634)
    In his funny email exchange this guy claims that the violation is the same as if someone took RedHat and repacked it without giving RedHat credit.

    He misses the point that that is FINE. In fact, mandrake did that for a while, with a few changes.

    The GPL means you can copy, rename etc as long as you contribute the source back, and make sure copyright in the source is accurate.

    He needs to get a grip.

  • Mac Developers (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I don't think that it is true that...

    "There's definitely some tension between the mac world and the Open Source and GPL worlds. Certain amounts of culture clash are inevitable, but hopefully great projects like this will continue, and commercial vendors will be able to play nice without alienating developers."

    The Mac has been an excellent environment for hacking around. Apple has always been the brave alternative for more free-thinking computer users than IBM-PCs and 'nix boxen. It wasn't about the source code then, but it was definetly a matter of integrity. There isn't a culture clash taking place, Fink's maintainer was simply overworked and too posessive of his changes. I think he's more than a bit arrogant and if you take the time to read his stuff I imagine that you'll agree. He didn't _write_ the programs he's porting and he's generally not helping their developers port it (which, IMHO is the correct and standard way to port an Open Source app)!

    Apple should be recognized and praised for releasing Darwin as Open Source. In olden times source code was prized as a resource because you could share it, learn from it, extend it, appreciate it, etc not because of a highly politicized IP philosophy. The GPL does not define Open Source software! If you write code and truly want to share it then do so! Truly respectable developers will credit you appropriately. But, Fink's maintainer is over-estimating his due praise!

  • For the best. (Score:3, Flamebait)

    by Enahs ( 1606 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @07:16PM (#2566706) Journal
    It's pretty obvious that Cristoph is screaming "sour grapes" and doesn't fully understand the GPL.



    In his email, he mentions releasing, say, Red Hat Linux with a few changes and no mention of RH, which would be okay. Not nice, but okay.



    Can anyone point out the GPL violation, or is this another Slashdot fuckup?

  • Perfect example of why NOT to use the GPL. (Score:4, Informative)

    by Fucky Badger ( 535691 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @07:28PM (#2566761)
    The GPL license offers a very beautiful dream, free, unrestricted access to software for the people of the world. No doubt this would be great, free technology for people in the third world countries (including me) and no more gigantic monopolistic companies telling you where to go today. I also believed in that dream, however I tried FreeBSD because I wanted to see how the traditional UNIX was. I could have tried NetBSD but I simply had a contact with FreeBSD first. FreeBSD has only one distribution and, of course, includes many GPL'd programs, something that shows without doubt that BSD hackers don't "hate" the GPL as a general rule, in fact, there is a sense of respect towards of the code written by the FSF and any comment against the GPL starts a never ending flame war in the lists.

    I then decided to follow my ideals, and some years ago I pursued some email with Richard Stallman (RMS for short) on three issues:

    1) The Free Software Foundation should support the efforts against crypto export restrictions in the US. It was suspected some linux distributions were exporting this code but there was no official statement on this.

    He (RMS) agreed that such restrictions were against the spirit of free software redistribution. He included a link to the Electronic Frontier Foundation in the Free Software Foundation's site.

    2)During our email, he insisted I should use the term GNU/Linux, something that sounded perfectly logical although somewhat uncomfortable. I then asked if I could use the term GNU/FreeBSD and GNU/AIX (I used AIX with a complete GNU development system since those parts were unbundled by IBM) since I was using GNU components that were much bigger and equally important (at least to me) as the kernel.

    RMS responded on both cases with a clear " no".

    3) I commented that, given the FSF's objectives, FreeBSD was doing a better job than Linux.

    He (and no doubt many readers) was surprised by this affirmation and asked for an explanation. I reasoned that since the objective behind the FSF was providing free software, and Linux was being heavily commercialized while FreeBSD was not, FreeBSD was nearer to the objectives. In those days, the newly born Caldera's distribution had a lot of commercial goodies and their base distribution couldn't be downloaded anywhere, I also commented that no one could stop the companies like Caldera from gradually replacing free parts of GNU/Linux with commercial elements until they would effectively replace the complete OS (I also mentioned the linux emulation in BSD in another context). To this final point, RMS responded that the only thing we could do was write more free software.

    Nowadays I personally think that Richard Stallman is a good person but he is confused (I hope he thinks the same of me when he finishes reading this article :), and I am not going to analyze the answers RMS gave because that is not the objective of this article. I arrived, however, to two important conclusions:

    the GNU Public License will not save the world,
    there shouldn't be a universal license; different situations require different licenses.

  • This happens all the time (Score:4, Interesting)

    by jlv ( 5619 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @07:42PM (#2566823)
    There are lots of "developers" out there that take other people's work and include it in their own project, without keeping the license and/or without giving due credit. This happens all the time.

    The only way to police this -- and stop it -- is to go public with the problem. But that has it's own problem -- most no one will care about the problem.

    Notice that Fink went public with these infringements 3 weeks ago.

    It takes making the "public" is glaring away -- via a front page posting at /. That will get the infringement dealt with.

    This will work for big projects like Fink. That means that little projects will get their work stolen from without any real means to fight back.

    I know all too well.

    I worked up what I consider a really clever kludge for blocking banner ads via the Proxy Auto Config mechanism built into Netscape (since 2.0) and IE (since 4.0). http://www.schooner.com/~loverso/no-ads/ [schooner.com] I made this kludge right around Netscape 2.02, Spring 1996. (That was my JavaScript hacking days)

    The PAC file I make available has been mentioned by me /. and by others on memepool and metafilter. I release it under a simple license: you may use it or distribute it as much as you like, as long as you don't charge, keep my copyright, the notice that I wrote it stays intact.

    I do this for the fun of it, after all.

    Last year I read in the 5/28 "Gearhead" column in Network World Fusion where he talks about this a spyware blocking software. He mentions that it can also generate proxy auto config files to block web sites with ads.

    Hmmmm, I think.

    I download the software. Yup, there's my stuff inside his package. I go to the author's webpage. His documentation on Proxy Auto Config files turns out to be identical to the my documentation in my PAC file.

    My copyright notice is gone. There is no mention that the PAC file was (originally) written by me. There is no indication the package in question contains works by anyone other than the author of the package.

    I mentioned this in email to the author of the package. I mentioned this in his forum. I mentioned this to the author of the "Gearhead" column.

    This person is still using my ideas, my code, and my documentation in his tool, and still isn't giving credit (or my copyright notice).

    His attitude is: "I got it off some web site, so I can do whatever I want with it.".

    Here's my post to his message board: http://www.morelerbe.com/cgi-bin/ubb-cgi/ultimateb b.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=36&t=000140 [morelerbe.com]

    (psst: don't use his software: he's a plagerist!)

  • Never claimed as a GPL violation (Score:5, Interesting)

    by barberio ( 42711 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @09:34PM (#2567059) Homepage
    I hardly ever post comments to Slashdot, but this time I'm going to.

    This article steps over the line and into libal. OpenOSX is not violating the GPL, it never was, and it wasnt even acused of doing so. What did happen is that Pfisterer thought that every redistributor who used Gimp and Frink should point out that he's responsable. Which may seam reasionable, but the problem is you have lots of contributors behind gimp, do they all get credits on the web page and promotional material? Or do you do what *every* other distribution does, and put the READMEs and CONTRIBUTORs files in the documentation and source.

    Acusing OpenOSX of violating the GPL on a high trafic site like this is going to damage them a lot. How about an apology for publishing something that was flat wrong? its what I'd expect from a real news source.

    What have OpenOSX done wrong? Sell open source software CDs at a high mark up, RedHat does that.

    As a long time reader of Slashdot, I'm getting fed up of the Tabloid instincts being shown, and I'd like the Editorial Staff to Grow Up and show some Responsability.

  • Open Note to Christoph Pfisterer (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Whatchamacallit ( 21721 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2001 @10:24PM (#2567194) Homepage
    Having worked customer service for the last 10 years, I have to make this comment. You should not be doing customer relations or customer service in any way shape or form. You simply cannot handle the stress...

    It took me about 3 years to develop an attitude that didn't make me want to kick my cat or yell at people for cutting me off in a gas station after work.

    If you can't take the stress of dealing with idiots and morons, you should not be a project leader/maintainer. Especially for Mac users! (Not a dig or a flame!) But they aren't known for their technical self-help-can-do attitudes. These folks are used to the = MacOS 9 and not a Unix based system like MacOSX. They are used to simple easy to use software and operating systems.

    What I learned was the ability to not give a shit if I pleased these people. Don't get me wrong, I truly care to help people and do so every single day. But I always see the same idiots over and over calling me to walk them through the same exact procedure over the phone. Most of these guys/gals are a communications nightmare who can barely use a mouse and they don't know how to listen nor follow directions. We are talking about 3 hour phone calls to accomplish something that should only take 10min.

    That said, I can relate to what you are going through. I've written over 300MB worth of web pages detailing all sorts of technical data and my own technical teammates still line up at my desk with questions that are answered in the documentation. Heck if the techs don't read it what makes you think the end users will?

    However, it is a crime to just loose it with a customer. Even if that customer is not paying for your services (mine sure as hell aren't...). It was even worse that you publically did it in an open forum. Heck in a professional environment, if I am going to tear someone a new asshole, I take them into a private location where no one else can hear us and I let'em have it.

    What you need to learn to do is to roll with the punches, dodge and weave to avoid the bullets, and still maintain an easy going attitude. I do not carry these frustrations around with me. I have learned to exercise extreme patience. If you cannot learn to do this, stay far far away from customer service positions.

    I do the bare minimum for the idiots and morons but go the extra mile for the ones who are at least polite and pleasant. If an idiot happens to be at least pleasant and nice then they might get extra help.

    Things you could have done:

    1. Made an email template with RTFM and links to the FAQ, etc. in it. The latest versions that have been tested, etc. Just forward these automated responses to the idiots.

    2. You could just ignore the morons, heck you are not making money on this. You don't need to email all of them. I am sure people like Linus ignore emails all the time.

    3. Setup a survey to find out just how many users are actually happy with the Fink project. I bet they outnumber the ones who were pissing you off!
    • I use the "butt factor". If a co-worker wants to ask me something, I won't answer unless he gets up from his butt and comes to ask me personally.

      The theory is that if the question is not worth getting out of the chair for him, it is not worth answering for me.

      This sounds perhaps a bit rude, but frankly, when someone just shouts from the other side of the room, asking a question he knows he can get easier from you than from a simple look at the manual, he not only interrupts my work, he also interrupts everyone else's work. And that's just plain lazy and selfish.

      Of course, it works for me too: If I really need to know something, I always consider whether it's worth for me to get up and go ask someone who knows as opposed to just trying to search the manual.


  • What we have here is an ego conflict, and one guy whining about not getting credit. IMHO, OpenOSX has in no way violated the GPL -- If I remember correctly, the GPL does NOT make "giving credit to the original author" a manditory requirement of authorship. Sure, its a nice thing to do, but you're not obligated to do so. However, the GPL does make provision of the sourcecode upon request manditory, and OpenOSX has easilly exceeded this. They've bundled the source with the CD. No request necessary--its right there under your nose.

    What happened here looks more like Fink's author had his feelings hurt when he realized people were using his work without giving him a pat on the head. Welcome to the open-source movement, Cristoph. Thats how it works. If you wanted to be assured of recieving some sort of acknowledgement of your efforts, you should have went with a BSD license, and not the GPL.

    I might also add its terribly irresponsible (not to mention unprofessional) for Slashdot to assert that OpenOSX is guilty of GPL violations.

    No, I don't use a Mac. I don't even have a stake in this whole argument.. I just don't like it when the facts [sourceforge.net] are misrepresented. Read it for yourself.

    Cheers,
  • Lawyer to client: Sir, you have a very good case. Our firm is ready to proceed. Only one small detail remains to be settled: How much justice can you afford?

    That pretty much summarizes the gap between theory and reality when it comes to enforcing legal rights. It's one thing to have a legal right. It's quite another thing to force people to respect that right.

    And this is a practical matter that does not seem to occur to the "software wants to be free" crowd. You can impose all the "copylefts" and "artistic licenses" you want. But when the time comes to enforce your rules for distributing your software, you have to pay some very expensive professionals to make this happen. How are you going to do this if you software is not a source of revenue?

  • I don't know about the rest of you, but I took some time to read all of the links provided; the resignation letter and the links that came with it, the email correspondence with the packager of openosx, all of that. I'll probably get flamed for this, but I came away with a feeling that all the involved parties have serious maturity problems. One person takes another person's comments too seriously and blows up at them. One person takes a user's simple oversight and turns it into a haneous crime. chrisp and finyard in the bug tracker were just plain rude at times. Users ask dumb questions. We've all been on mailing lists and in the newsgroups. In fact we were all there at one point or another asking those same stupid questions. If people had flamed us with snide remarks, we would have probably said 'fsck this' and moved on to something else. There's no reason for chrisp to have been rude in the bug tracker, no matter how dumb of a question was asked. That's a responsibility that comes with being in a position such as that. All I can say to the parties involved is either grow up and be adults about this or meet out by the swing set at recess and settle it like the children you're acting like.

    • BTW (Score:2)

      by macdaddy ( 38372 )
      For the record before anyone replies to my message, I do understand the frustrations of chrisp. Dealing with stupid questions can quickly get on your nerves. Doing something with little to no credit also makes you question the worth of what you're doing. However if you do something good and you don't get public credit for it, you shouldn't doubt what you've done. You've already done it. If you doubt yourself after the fact when something doesn't go your way then it wasn't worth doing in the first place.
  • For crying out loud. He didnt resign over the violations. He resigned becouse he didnt feel he was being given credit where he thought it was due. Totally understandably. In none of the above cases where there ANY GPL violations. If anything, I'd say wanting to recieve public credit is, in part, against the 'feeling' of the GPL. It shouldn't be, but the GPL basically says 'Take it, use it, modify it, pass it on'. It doesnt say 'Ensure that you've bent over backwards to stroke the ego of the individuals that wrote it'. Ok, last statement not really fair the the above individual, becouse credit IS deserved, but I dunno, hes so fed up, he sounds kinda whiny..
  • The fink author should talk to Warren Robinette, the author of Adventure for the 2600. Or in a more recently example, speak to the authors of anything coming from Apple.

    What these people have in common with the author of Fink is that they wrote software for which they didn't receive obvious credit (Apple recently removed credits so that people couldn't target specific Apple employees for recruitment to another software house). Just as not getting specific credit is written into Apple employees' contracts and was written into Atari programmers (one reason so many of the best worked for Activision), the "contract" your essentially "sign" when releasing GPL software doesn't have any provisions to retain who did the work.

    One might take a cue from Mr. Robinette and include something in the code that gives you specific credit -- he created the first easter egg in a video game that displayed his name on the screen as the game's author (take a look at the end of the decompiled source to the game. Download the zip on this page: http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/archives/20011 1/msg00086.html).

    Or one might take an even better cue from those who worked for Activision: If it's key for you to receive credit for your work, make sure it's in the contract!

Slashdot Top Deals

It is now pitch dark. If you proceed, you will likely fall into a pit.

Close