Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> __/ [ Roy Schestowitz ] on Friday 16 March 2007 02:16 \__
>
>> __/ [ [H]omer ] on Thursday 15 March 2007 21:29 \__
>>
>>>>> Time to fork, Bailo. Fork, fork, fork.
>>>
>>> No need. AFAICT OpenSuSE is as much of a fork from SLED as any SuSE user
>>> will ever need.
>>
>> Will the fork be subjected to the rules/limitations of Novell's Linux?
>> Therein lies the dilemma. It might require some 'cleansing'. Think
>> Ubuntu-gNewSense.
>
> This is becoming more intersting...
>
> http://boycottnovell.com/2007/03/14/novell-openoffice/#comment-431
>
> Novell may actually be leading itself into a route that discriminates against
> Linux.
>
There is a clear agenda here, and it is not positive either for Open
Source or for Linux distributions generally. Probably the biggest issue
the free software world has here is that since there is no central
voice, highlighting these issues is very difficult indeed. A very large
number of people were taken in by the Microsoft-funded SCO anti-Linux
action, and I'm quite sure that a similar set of under-competent senior
management types will be equally taken in by this approach, too.
In the long-run, it will fail, of course, but it will also delay the
wider adoption of OpenOffice and Linux due to the *deliberate forking*
paid for by *Microsoft*.
Microsoft have frequently warned of the risk of forking in the free
software world, but to their great disappointment, this has not
happened, so instead, they're paying Novell to do it for them. This
point really needs to be combined with the other posting, I think.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
