Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Ubuntu !free

[John Southern]

On Saturday 03 May 2008 13:56:37 Mac wrote:
> I'd be interested in the views of folks here about a few questions,
> which I ask out of a genuine wish to investigate the issues, and with no
> wish to score points.
> #   First, in the context of concerns about Canonical's values, I'd be
> interested in what folk think of Mark Shuttleworth's ideas about Gobuntu
> and gNewSense:
> http://blue-gnu.biz/content/rethinking_gobuntu

If they can be joined without making too much of a compromise, then all the 
better as it would save re-inventing the wheel each time.

> #   Second, as I understand it rms doesn't approve of Debian any more
> than he does of Ubuntu.  The Gnu project only endorses as free
> gNewSense, Ututo and a few others:
>
> http://www.gnu.org/links/links.html
>
> Does any one here only ever use one of these totally free distro;  what
> (moral) issues does that raise in their daily work, and how do they
> resolve these?

Having many boxes at home, I decided last Christmas to go GNU/Linux only on a 
box. I went to the above link and at the time it only listed gNewSense, 
Ututo, dyne:bolic and BLAG. I am sure I did not see GNUstep Live. I checked 
each at the time and except for dyne:bolic, the others were all old. Looking 
today, I see that gNewSense released version 2.0 at the end of April.
gNewSense just seemed wrong, being based on Ubuntu, but with only the free 
repositories available. This is effectively not giving me a choice. Now while 
I tend to be stuck in the past using old code anyway and it probably would 
not matter to me, the thought that someone has cripple the option seems a 
step too far.
BLAG is similar being based on Fedora, but many years ago the BLAG video shown 
at a GLLUG meeting annoyed me and if I want a copyright free Fedora I will 
chose K12 or Aurox. Just taking something away or changing a logo, does not 
add to anything
Ututo, I should have tried, but I had used dyne:bolic in the past so I went 
for something I knew. In the end I chose dyne:bolic as 2.5.2 had just been 
released.
Morally, I like this distro as the developer has written many of the 
application. He has actually done something rather than just talking about 
it. It does not effect my day job, which deals with Unix boxes. The company 
decides which distributions to use and while I have an opinion, it is not 
practical to get support for thousands of boxes from these free 
distributions.
At home dyne:bolic works fine and I will forever marvel in wonder at Jaromil 
and how much work he has done.

> #   My last question is related to the second, but is more complex.
> Most GNU/Linux distros are markedly 'more free' than proprietary
> operating systems, and users who choose freedom should always prefer
> GNU/Linux to a proprietary OS.  But some GNU/Linux distros use more
> proprietary code than others, and very few have none.  So when
> persuading the users of a proprietary OS that their freedom is better
> served by GNU/Linux, should we be glad that they are willing to use a
> 'less free GNU/Linux', rather than no GNU/Linux at all?  And then should
> we be glad that they are willing to use a less-free GNU/Linux when they
> would not be willing to use one that has little or no proprietary
> components or respos?
>
> This last question is really about where the edges of our idea of
> freedom are.  Would we allow people the freedom to chose and use what is
> less good, or insist that they should forgo the use of software entirely
> until it is all free?
>
> I struggle with this stuff, as I guess we all do.  So I'm really
> interested to hear your thoughts and get your help on this.

<flameon>
I sit so far to one side on this debate that I lurk and if others want me to 
leave I would comply.
I cannot attend on Tuesdays and even on another day the early start means I 
could not do a real days work and make it on time.

I would happily recommend MS Windows if that best suited the needs of the 
individual. I **DO** recommend Debian when I can and for ease of installation 
Kubuntu. For business I tend to go with RedHat or SuSE because of the support 
contracts available. I am surrounded with boxes with twenty plus 
distributions. None are perfect for me. Most are used and are suitable and 
they tend to merge into the same thing. Looking at my list I must do 
something about it and cull most. Maybe a task for tonight.

A classic case of users needs is my brother. He is blind and the most computer 
challenged person I have ever known. Ask him to fix a car and he can. Amazing 
to watch as it is mostly done by feel, but switching on a computer is 
painful. I am not around all the time to assist and so he has to get support 
from other sources. This unfortunately means MS Windows. Getting a neighbour 
to help is very limiting. We have tried various Linux over the years with 
lots of failures. My next attempt will be the late May Bank Holiday when I 
will try with Orca. Not that he knows about this yet, but I will keep on 
trying.

There are so many licences and I am not a lawyer, nor am I willing to spend 
hours trying to work out which is better in some legalese. I am even happy 
with Creative Commons because I can see the intention that people want. Out 
of choice I go with GPL and v3 is a good step forward mainly due to history 
as something that has stood the test of time, but a better use of time would 
be to just lock up all lawyers.
When recommending free software I give my usual freedom speech, but I moderate 
from going into full rant as that would drive many away from the best option 
for their needs.
In my own case I am willing to use dyne:bolic and miss some things as I will 
either write them myself or live without. I want the source code as that is 
the only way I can learn.
I have probably tried more distros than most. Testing something for a few 
hours is useless and you normally need a few days to discover the gems. The 
first day is just trying to forget your current preferences which can be as 
simple as Gnome, KDE or IceWM.
I do not consider myself a Debian snob where I look down on Ubuntu. In fact I 
use both. Debian is on most boxes, but that is because once you have it on it 
is rare to reinstall. Newer machines I will tend to throw on Ubuntu and then 
customise to suit my needs. I should imaging everyone would hate my 
preferences, but it works both ways.
My laptop has only ever run a text only system but that is my choice. I will 
throw something graphical on it one day, but not just yet. Any 
recommendations for a distro on a very new piece of hardware?

This does put me at odds with RMS. Yes I use Dyne:bolic for my base home 
system but I also have Debian available. I am happy with a text editor (Not 
emacs, but that is a whole other flamewar) and even a text browser (w3m-img) 
but I would not dream of inflicting my choices on others if it did not suit 
them. It is very hard to convince teenagers that they should not use the same 
software that all their friends do because it is a proprietary format. I have 
done, but it is not easy.
I am not against MS. I just have no need of their software or lockins.
Over the years my opinions have fluctuated and I am sure they will do so 
again, but for now I go with what suits the user rather than the ideal 
licences. Does this mean I am giving in? Possibly, but it is an imperfect 
world and I am more worried about other freedoms such as the new rules on the 
Computer Misuse Act which came into force five days ago.
</flameon>

Regards
John