[LAU] Is there a newer, better "Jack Rack"?

Ralf Mardorf ralf.mardorf at alice-dsl.net
Sun Nov 8 11:02:24 UTC 2015

Hi Hermann,

I disagree.

On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 10:55:23 +0100, Hermann Meyer wrote:
>debian maintainers love to work in cooperation with upstream.

We seem to have different understandings of the word "cooperation", by
my definition "either-or" doesn't fit the semantics of "cooperation".

The GPL is lawfully accepted, OTOH the laws of our societies are
flexible, a law is below the constitution, so jurisdiction has got much
margin regarding horse-sense, proportionality.

A few Linux distros, one of them is seemingly Debian, follow an orthodox
worldview, there seems to be the idea of a GPL that expect strict laws,
perhaps comparable to the sharia, but usually the GPL is within western
societies laws and our laws aren't that "either-or", "black or white".

If forks are unwanted, then upstream of GPLed software is able to
terminate forks by pressure and nobody from the Debian maintainers
considers this as a violation of the GPL by upstream. Here Debian is
flexible, were already something that doesn't fit the spirit of GNU
happened, but for Linuxsampler a real issue comparable to the
Aeolus issue never happened, there are just a few words.

The message is, that for GNU/Linux Debian not the deeds are relevant,
the words are relevant. To name it GPL, but don't accept the GPL is ok,
but to name it GPL with an exception, while no issue regarding a deed
ever happened is unacceptable.

For my horse-sense this is ridiculous.


More information about the Linux-audio-user mailing list