Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
GNU is Not Unix

Richard Stallman Defies Push By 27 GNU Project Developers To End His Leadership (zdnet.com) 387

"27 GNU project maintainers and developers have signed on to a joint statement asking for Richard Stallman to be removed from his leadership role at GNU," writes Slashdot reader twocows.

The statement argues that "Stallman's behavior over the years has undermined a core value of the GNU project: The empowerment of all computer users. GNU is not fulfilling its mission when the behavior of its leader alienates a large part of those we want to reach out to."

The Register reports: The GNU maintainer memo follows a statement issued by the Free Software Foundation on Sunday. The FSF said that because Stallman founded the GNU Project and the FSF, and until recently had led both, the relationship between the two organizations remains in flux. "Since RMS resigned as president of the FSF, but not as head of GNU, the FSF is now working with GNU leadership on a shared understanding of the relationship for the future," the FSF said.

Matt Lee, a free and open-source software developer and one of the 18 [now 27] signatories of the joint statement, said that the two organizations have been intertwined for so long -- the FSF provides GNU with financial, technical, and promotional assistance -- that their relationship is confusing. "For example, the GNU GPL is published by the FSF, not GNU," Lee said. "Key infrastructure that GNU relies on is owned by the FSF, and used by GNU and non-GNU projects alike."

ZDNet reports: Stallman's only comment on this situation so far has been: "As head of the GNU Project, I will be working with the FSF on how to structure the GNU Project's relationship with the FSF in the future."
LWN.net notes that the next day Stallman issued an additional statement: As Chief GNUisance, I'd like to reassure the community that there won't be any radical changes in the GNU Project's goals, principles and policies.

I would like to make incremental changes in how some decisions are made, because I won't be here forever and we need to ready others to make GNU Project decisions when I can no longer do so. But these won't lead to unbounded or radical changes.

But the Register notes that Stallman's personal web site has also changed the first headline across the top of its page. It used to promote the Free Software Foundation's giving guide, saying "If you participate in the commercial ritual of end-of-the-year presents, please avoid the digital products that would mistreat the people you give them to."

It nows says: I continue to be the Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project.

I do not intend to stop any time soon.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Richard Stallman Defies Push By 27 GNU Project Developers To End His Leadership

Comments Filter:
  • Witch hunt (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 12, 2019 @01:39PM (#59299928)

    Thanks due to the crazy, power-hungry and useless SJWs...

    • Re:Witch hunt (Score:4, Insightful)

      by rlwinm ( 6158720 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @03:52PM (#59300390)
      SJW also (sadly) has the power to destroy open source. Well, probably most of our civilization. You can say there are 37 genders until you are blue in the face. That doesn't make it true.
  • Politics (Score:5, Insightful)

    by geekymachoman ( 1261484 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @01:42PM (#59299936)
    I don't get this at all. Maybe i'm getting old, don't know, but these 27 need to do more programming and less politics.

    Man, when I was young I was so anxious to "get to the future", i had so much high hopes... then when we're finally here...we got Lennart Pottering or whatever his fucking name is.
    • Re:Politics (Score:4, Insightful)

      by geek ( 5680 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @01:44PM (#59299938)

      I don't get this at all. Maybe i'm getting old, don't know, but these 27 need to do more programming and less politics.
       

      Seems to me RMS needs to be doing more programming and less politics. How's HURD these days? I'm willing to bet those 27 contribute a hell of a lot more than RMS does.

      • What program is RMS most famous for? Seems like he was always on the political side of GNU, but now most of the debates are over.

        • Re:Politics (Score:4, Informative)

          by geek ( 5680 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @01:53PM (#59299970)

          What program is RMS most famous for? Seems like he was always on the political side of GNU, but now most of the debates are over.

          Mostly emacs IMHO. I dunno, he did a lot 20-30 years ago. He's been coasting on his MIT career for a long time.

          • Re:Politics (Score:4, Insightful)

            by slashdot_commentator ( 444053 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @03:08PM (#59300188) Journal

            He actually serves a useful function as the evangelist for the open source software movement and GPL. That's really been his career for the past thirty(?) years.

            I'm pretty sure he doesn't have any input to the compiler group (which is the only significant development project that may still be associated with GNU). And frankly, I'd prefer it stay that way.

        • Re:Politics (Score:5, Informative)

          by tietokone-olmi ( 26595 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @01:56PM (#59299978)

          He wrote the majority of the GNU C Compiler, back when it was just a C compiler.

          That's rather significant.

          • I'd be shocked if there was still a section of code he could claim as contributor.

            • The overall architecture is his. GIMPLE is all his, nobody would have added a LISP into C compiler.
            • Re:Politics (Score:5, Insightful)

              by tietokone-olmi ( 26595 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @04:28PM (#59300550)

              That's insignificant. Had there not been the GNU C Compiler, there would not have been the GNU Compiler Collection; the other compilers (for C++ and Objective C) came about because GCC was Free software which other companies had built alternative front-ends for, and therefore had to release under GPL terms or not distribute at all.

              For better or worse, rms is entirely responsible for GCC.

              • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

                I don't think the importance of GCC can be underestimated. Without it we would probably still be stuck having to pay for high quality compilers. Instead the benchmark by which all others are judged is Free.

                It opened up so many platforms that would otherwise have remained closed simply because writing software for them was so expensive.

      • It would not surprise me that some of those 27 program for GNU projects because of RMS. His contributions go well beyond the code he has written.
    • but these 27 need to do more programming and less politics.

      Its the GNU organization, famous for their almost operating system, GNU HURD. (Is the GNU compiler project still under the direct aegis of the GNU organization?) It would seem contradictory to their nature not to be submitting petitions.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      If they could program well they wouldn't be doing the politics, which has no place in a software development effort. Real projects have always been meritocracy based, and every time someone claimed they were not accepted because they are a certain race or sex it was a case of people who couldn't hack being a competent contributor. In the history of software nobody ever looked at code and said "It's beautiful. It's elegant. It's well documented. It is fast ... but did you hear who wrote it? REJECTED!" Well
      • by twocows ( 1216842 ) on Monday October 14, 2019 @01:23PM (#59306080)
        You're right that it doesn't belong in software development (unless it's directly relevant). However, I think plenty of good programmers are very political. RMS himself is a good example; stallman.org, his personal blog, has lots of political posts. And that's fine, because he keeps it separate from GNU unless it becomes relevant. That's how it should be.
    • Re:Politics (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Daemonik ( 171801 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @08:27PM (#59301326) Homepage

      I'm old too. I have never once seen a programming thread, open source thread or general tech thread on any newsgroup, forum or chat group that didn't devolve into a political rant about someone else's choices within 3 posts. Heck, you couldn't even make it 3 sentences without bringing SystemD in to piss on it. Or does it not occur to you that sort of thing is political?

      Objectively regarding RMS and this current situation, I would say that these maintainers have been wanting to get rid of his scruffy neckbeard for years and this situation is just the public face for it. That he can't get a majority to back him kind of says a lot about RMS as a manager of people vs politics. Make no mistake, his position at FSF/GNU has been all about politics and pushing his own vision of socialized software development for decades. Who knows how many projects he's killed because they didnt' meet his beliefs. Maybe if he'd done more cooperation instead of chastising over the years, he could have sped up OS adoption in corporations. Who can say.

      Regardless, these people want him gone and if you think it's because of this one event then you're quite mistaken. He's managed to lose their support and turn them against him and that sort of thing takes years of effort.

  • by Dagmar d'Surreal ( 5939 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @01:46PM (#59299946) Journal

    It's time for this nonsensical witch hunt to end. The recent ZDnet article once again repeated the nonsense that Stallman defended a "sexual abuser", which is a shamefully mealy-mouthed way of either calling Marvin Minsky a sexual abuser (which, judging by the number of people who knew him and think it's nonsense, is probably nonsense), or he's saying Stallman defended Epstein, which is something that anyone who did their research and went and read the emails for themselves knows absolutely did not happen.

    Apparently it's just too much trouble to ask "reporters" to do simple fact-checking when there's outrage clicks to be had.

    ...and I'm not try to dismiss anyone's contributions, but there's literally thousands of people who've contributed to GNU. That only 27 of them have been swooned by the witch hunt actually says good things about GNU developers in general, but it's still not a significant number of people making a reasoned and logical argument based on facts.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Chromal ( 56550 )
      It wouldn't hurt if Stallman could at least issue a statement of remorse for hard feelings that his comments that might have reasonably caused for actual victims of harassment or abuse and those who care about such things. Nobody good wants to march under a banner that promotes or even just tolerates misogyny and predation. Even if I believe RMS doesn't intend any of those ignoble things, his insensitivity has become a great liability, and his statements and attitudes, which he appears to be defiantly defen
      • by BrainJunkie ( 6219718 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @02:19PM (#59300038)

        It wouldn't hurt

        Yes it would.

        All that would do is give the crowd who leads these sort of things further encouragement to continue their behavior. It would do nothing to Minsky or Epstein, obviously, do nothing to discourage future perpetrators, nor help in any way the victims of any of their activities. Giving the outrage crowd will hasten their dissolution.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by jawtheshark ( 198669 ) *
        Apologising doesn't work with these kind of people.
      • Bullshit, kowtowing to snowflakes with chips on their shoulder looking for something to be offended at, and lying about finding it don't deserve an apology.

        No apology. Double down on the truth of what was really said. Shame the liars. That's the only way.

      • I notice that you haven't issued a statement of remorse for hard feelings from your comments. Why not?
      • by sjames ( 1099 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @02:55PM (#59300148) Homepage Journal

        His statements have not reasonably caused any hard feelings. The people who have claimed that he said things that he didn't actually say should be apologizing to Stallman AND everyone who has hard feelings as a result.

        Those people should even apologize to you for leading you to believe that Stallman said things that he didn't actually say.

        Don't believe the hype, Stallman's statements have been made public. Go read them.

      • Echoing the other comments, you never, ever, apologize to rage mobs, they pocket the apology as an admission of guilt and continue to pursue your destruction.
      • Even if I believe RMS doesn't intend any of those ignoble things, his insensitivity has become a great liability,

        That has been the case for RMS from the moment he became the founder and evangelist for the open source software movement. To not be cognizant of that is a true sign of clueless ignorance. I have zero confidence that any person associated with this SJW petition could possibly champion the cause as resolutely and single-mindedly as RMS. No one is perfect, SJWs are causing more harm than good to OSS, they should crawl back under their rock.

    • Nothing he said amount Minsky was really wrong, but is it true he's taken the nutty, contrarian hyper-libertarian "maybe pederasty isn't so bad for kids, derp!" stance?
      • No he didn't say that. I'll reference "Betteridge's law of headlines" here. You had to end that with a question mark, which implies that it's probably a false statement. The reasoning there is that if he ever said such a thing it's certain someone would have posted the quote of him saying it by now and you'd have already seen the quote.

    • by sjames ( 1099 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @02:44PM (#59300110) Homepage Journal

      Exactly. What he really did was publicly doubt that someone he has known for years committed a crime and restate the constitutional principle that he is innocent until proven guilty. He explicitly was not defending Epstein.

      As for the first point, people who were there have said Minsky declined the offer. As to the second, I would hope all Americans believe in the principles of the Constitution.

      Even for those who for some reason believe Minsky was a willing participant, whenever someone who once had a good social reputation turns out to have committed a heinous crime, friends and neighbors expressing dismay and disbelief is so common it's stereotypical. Why is it now suddenly worthy of crucifixion?

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @04:40PM (#59300596) Homepage Journal

        No, that's exactly what the DIDN'T do. So spreading misinformation.

        Stallman posted a hypothetical based on the assumption that Minsky did have sex with the girl, stating only that he had no reason to doubt that they did.

        His argument was then that, based on that assumption, it would not have been sexual assault given Minsky's reasonable assumption that she consented.

        Why does no one seem to have read the actual email, only inaccurate second hand accounts? Why does quoting the email get you modded down?

    • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @04:14PM (#59300484)
      Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • by dabadab ( 126782 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @04:54PM (#59300638)

        The letter that is the subject of this article has nothing to do with RMS's defense of Minsky. It has to do with a long standing issue that RMS, apparently, sexually harassed a large number of women, making quite a few leave the industry

        The letter actually mentions none of that. Are there any credible sources for this?

        • by Antique Geekmeister ( 740220 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @05:35PM (#59300810)

          The sex slave accuser, Virginia Giuffre, is not credible with many of her claims, which she ma makes in her biography. Some of the claims from her biography are "fictionalized" according to her own attorneys. In her court testimony about serving as a sexual slave, she said that the could not remember where, or when, she had sex with him. Minsky's wife claims that Virginia had no such contact with Minsky. And she made claims about _dozens_ of powerful men she had sex with while serviing as a sex slave, all of whom specifically deny any sexual contact.

      • by OldMugwump ( 4760237 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @06:13PM (#59300968) Homepage
        I don't think Minsky would have to be a "fucking idiot" to honestly believe that Ms.Giuffre was "entirely willing". There are such things as groupies, and Minsky was the most famous computer scientist in the world.

        Neither do I think that Minsky actually slept with her. I knew him and I think it would be out of character for him.

        Re your claims in #2, yes I have personally witnessed RMS hitting on nearly every woman age 16-40 that he meets - including my girlfriend (now wife), when he knew she was my girlfriend.

        It's rude, but I don't think it rises to the level of sexual harassment. Making an offer, once, isn't enough in my book.
      • I don't know anything about #2, the letter doesn't say anything about what you're claiming, but for #1: just how are you using the word "coerced"? Even if Minsky looked at himself every day in the mirror and said, "God I'm ugly, no one would ever want to have sex with me." why on earth would Minsky assume that she had been forced, rather than paid? Prostitution is, after all, what Epstein had been convicted for, years prior.

        Payment is not coercion, despite what people might say about wage slavery. So unl
  • by Kunedog ( 1033226 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @01:53PM (#59299972)
    Want to muscle your way into an OSS project, despite lacking the talent or skill (or willingness) to contribute anything other than drama, identity politics, and an insatiable urge control others (or remove them if they don't fall in line)? Force a Code of Conduct (which is often itself explicitly racist and/or sexist, dismissive of merit, and vague enough to be selectively enforced) down its throat! It even works on the largest, most influential projects, and lets you dictate developers' behavior on unrelated corners of the web!

    Stack Overflow is also getting fucked over by an SJW CoC as we speak!

    http://archive.is/4vV8z [archive.is]

    https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak... [reddit.com]
    https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak... [reddit.com]
    https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak... [reddit.com]
    http://contributor-covenant.or... [contributor-covenant.org]

    http://developers.slashdot.org... [slashdot.org]
    https://www.reddit.com/r/freeb... [reddit.com]
    • by sinij ( 911942 )
      Self-correcting problem. These projects will die when contributors leave due to toxic politics onto different projects/hobbies.
  • I have my concern that with this there will be people trying to move the GNU GPL license away from copyleft and allow future versions of this license to be close sourced. If commercial licenses exists as the wish of the developers, copyleft license should also be respected.
  • by tietokone-olmi ( 26595 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @02:01PM (#59299986)

    The GNU project (and in a greater sense, the GNU General Public License) do not empower the masses through participation in GNU projects under the GNU umbrella, or any project in general or particular. This is borne out in the GPL's perpetual permission to fork any GPL'd project under the same terms; it means "if you like the software but not the way it's run, you can take a copy of our toys and strike out on your own".

    Rather, GNU (and the GNU GPL) empower the masses through availability of GPL'd works, and in particular through the copyleft feature which (when laws related to copyright and licensing are followed) keeps these works available in perpetuity. This is by far the greater good when compared to combatting a hypothetical objection along the lines of I don't like rms, so I won't participate in a GNU project".

    These guix people have had an axe to grind with rms since before he dismissed their proposed CoC as punitive a while back. It's no surprise they'd join the stone-throwing.

    • by godrik ( 1287354 )

      This is borne out in the GPL's perpetual permission to fork any GPL'd project under the same terms; it means "if you like the software but not the way it's run, you can take a copy of our toys and strike out on your own".

      I think they should fork GNU and maybe use a recursive acronymn like GNGNU for GNGNU's Not Gnu's Not Unix.

  • Give your loyalty to an idea or movement. NEVER give your loyalty to a person.
  • Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @02:41PM (#59300098)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Reading accounts if RMS's behaviour it seems they have some valid complaints.

    • I think one reason we have a lot of gender-dominated fields -- ie, "mens jobs" or "womens jobs" isn't exclusively the result of overt gender discrimination, but because by and large segregating men and women results in improved economic productivity.

      It's not even a question of morality or behavior, it's like some kind of inherent behavioral problem whereby women don't integrate well into all-male groups, and neither do men in all-female groups. More evenly balanced gender groups (or at least where there's

    • that kind of behind the scenes psycho manipulative gaslighting brainwashing mob summoning behavior, that is the main tool of violence of women.

      The kind of that mother in the Sixt Sense that cheerly sloowly poisons her child without even blinking.
      The kind that casually states that pychological violence "is not violence". (I have personally seen the brain's pain center lighting up from that, ten times more than from physical violence!)
      The kind that summons an entire mob of white knights to do the physical vi

  • How many developers are there in the nebulous GNU project?
    500? 1000? 5000?
    I don't think 27 developers being whiny little bitches really matters.
    • I don't think 27 developers being whiny little bitches really matters.

      It does if they are recognized lead organizers of their respective projects.

    • It doesn't matter to you, though; if that's how you talk about project maintainers, we know you're not one of the developers.

  • Good for him! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dist_morph ( 692571 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @02:59PM (#59300154)
    Fork if you don’t like that he’s involved in the project he dedicated his entire life to.
  • *Deliberately* misinterpreting something, making false implications, and implying prejudiced intentions, for the sole purpose of murdering somebody's public reputation and life.

    What the fuck is this? A fucking witch trial in the dark ages??

    Frankly, I would BET you, that every single one of those 27, is himself a closeted sick fuck. It would explain why they assume those intentions and mindsets. Because people usually assums other people work like them themselves too.

    Sorry that Stallman is not a p.c. terrori

  • Seriously. :-)

    FreeBSD and NetBSD forked from 386BSD when the founders of 386BSD went radio silent (and were being a tad antisocial).

    Cygnus (?) forked egcs from gcc when the gcc maintainers wouldn't cooperate. (IIRC the gcc maintainers finally relented and egcs and gcc merged back together. Anyone know the real story?)

    I personally don't think there's anything magic about the GNU name or the gnu.org domain. AFAIK those 27 can take their projects anywhere they want and carry on, and leave the old bit
  • Screaming Monkeys (Score:4, Insightful)

    by K. S. Van Horn ( 1355653 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @05:04PM (#59300682) Homepage

    I am so goddamned sick and tired of cancel culture taking a man's words (*always* a man, never a woman) and twisting them into something other than what was intended. We have here a replay of the lynch mob that went after Nobel prize-winning chemist Tim Hunt. Once again we have screaming monkeys hurling shit at a man who has contributed far more to humanity than his critics ever have or ever will.

    • by Can'tNot ( 5553824 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @08:26PM (#59301322)

      (*always* a man, never a woman)

      While your description of events is mostly accurate, this bit is not true. How about Brie Larson? The internet lost its shit when she made some comments at a speech. Those comments were poorly considered, but still just a few comments. Not a representation of who she is as a person. Kinda like Tim Hunt.

      There are other examples. Mob mentality is bad for everyone, it's not just men.

  • by Voice of satan ( 1553177 ) on Sunday October 13, 2019 @10:01AM (#59302712)

    Zdnet has published carefully edited quotes of RMS to make sensationalist headlines. they are as fake as it could be. I do not even understand why slashdot links to that miserable tabloid.

An Ada exception is when a routine gets in trouble and says 'Beam me up, Scotty'.

Working...