Re: lynx-dev On invitations and pressure

[Bela Lubkin]

> The same message inaccurately states that the GNU Project is opposed
> to "commercial software entities".  We do aim to replace proprietary

I don't want to get into a "he said, she said" argument with you.  My
perception is that GNU/FSF *are* opposed to most commercial software
entities.

GNU software is no longer "free" because you defend it so vigorously
from use by, as you put it, "proprietary" software companies.  Thus we
devolve into doublespeak; is it 1984 yet?

All of my objections center around one insurmountable obstacle.  You (I
think more RMS than GNU/FSF) insist that if GNU software is included
into a "proprietary" project, that project must become "free" by your
definition.  This "viral aspect of the license" (I think I'm
more-or-less quoting you correctly) makes it simply unusable by certain
companies, and makes those companies extremely shy of having *anything*
to do with "free" software whatsoever.  You are thus disinviting
thousands of developers from your party.

Lynx-dev is the wrong venue for this argument.  But that's OK -- I don't
really want to have the argument at all, because you aren't going to
convince me, I'm not going to convince you, and the resulting hot air
just contributes to global warming.

>Bela<