November 2003 - Fsf-friends

To open software within three years
by Manjush G.Menon 26 Sep '05

26 Sep '05

Original Message ----- From: "IT@School" <itschool(a)asianetindia.com> To: <manjushmenon(a)hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2002 5:08 PM Subject: Reply > Mr.Manjush G. Menon > We are not giving to depend totally on Ms. Products. Rather MS > Office is taught along with open office and Windows along with Linux > from this year. Arranging the resource persons for training an open > software, making available the software, the maintenance of a help desk > etc. are logistical issues which could not be immediately undertaken. > We plan switch out to open software within three years. > Executive Director > ---- Original Message ----- From: Manjush G. Menon To: itschool(a)asianetindia.com Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 5:46 PM Subject: Respected sir, From Manjush G. Menon, Sr.Programmer, Sofker Solutions Pvt Ltd, Kochi-18. To The Executive Director, 'IT @ SCHOOL' Project, SCERT Buildings, Poojapura, Thiruvananthapuram-12. Respected sir, SUB: In protest against the inclusion of products from multinational companies in the syllabus of 'IT @ SCHOOL' It's a very dissappointing fact that when the whole world is moving towards Free software, we at kerala are going behind a major MNC - Microsoft. I hereby register my protest in such an act from 'IT @ SCHOOL' Project team. Breaking of prototypes will definetly help us in finding economical and high quality products for our future generation. For students and programmers, the GNU Linux contains 'GNU Compiler Collections' which includes C, C++, FORTRAN, PERL, TCL etc. Also, for DTP and other publishing purposes, it includes GNU Office utilities like Abi-Word, gedit, and other worksheet utilities, all these with a nominal cost of Rs 700-800/-. The software as it is, is free and the cost is accounted towards the media (CD + Documentation) included. By this letter, I urge you to take this matter seriously and suggest necessary modifications in the action plan of 'IT @ SCHOOL' project. Wishing you all the best and wishing all 'Students @ SCHOOL' a bright future, Thanking you, Yours faithfully Manjush G. Menon. ______________________________________________________ Check out all the latest outrageous email attachments on the Outrageous Email Chart! - http://viral.lycos.co.uk

2 1

PERUVIAN EFFORT COULD BAN MICROSOFT ON GOV. COMPUTERS (fwd)
by Frederick Noronha 16 Sep '04

16 Sep '04

Thanks to George Lessard for posting this across. FN ---------- Forwarded message ---------- PERUVIAN EFFORT COULD BAN MICROSOFT ON GOV. COMPUTERS Peruvian Congressman Edgar Villanueva is pushing legislation to obligate all public institutions to convert exclusively to open-source software. Open-source programs, embodied by the Linux operating system, have underlying code available to anyone who wants to modify or customize it. Such software, in unadorned form, can be downloaded from the Internet for free. Villanueva hopes his measure triggers activity in Peru's software industry by freeing programmers from the constraints of working with coding controlled by a few large companies. Open-source could take the expense out of software upgrades; which is important for a country like Peru that owes about $30 million in overdue software license fees. [SOURCE: San Jose Mercury, AUTHOR: Associated Press] (http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/news/3531007.htm)

3 2

Free without ambiguity and overapplicability
by Ramanraj K 30 Nov '03

30 Nov '03

There is an animadversion that proprietary software is given away "free" and therefore, Free Software is ambigious. Let us see if there is any truth in this criticism. Since the literal use of the word "free" is involved, let us have a look at what "free" means. Upon the word "free", the OED says: ~ not in bondage to another, having personal rights, social and political liberty ~ inheriting citizen rights and liberties ~ member of fraternity for mutual help and brotherly feeling ~ unfettered in action, unimpeded ~ open to all comers ~ spontaneous, unforced, unearned, gratuitous, willing ~ voluntary, not concealing one's opinions, blunt ~ released from difficulty ~ no fees charged ~ make free, set at liberty If the word "free" is used to qualify software, then it would naturally and literally mean and include all the above meanings listed above. If the object qualified with "free" is not free in any sense of the word, then the overapplicability should be restricted, to convey the true qualities of the software without ambiguity. We rightly use "free" in Free Software scoring a clean 10 out of 10, whereas, the proprietary software companies use the word "free" incorrectly, inappropriately, ambigiously and with overapplicability, really scoring a poor 0 out of 10, meaning they cannot use the word "free" correctly or honestly and is only a misnomer. Let us closely examine the context in which the word "free" is used by the free software community and the proprietary software entities to qualify software. [0] No bondage to others: Free software is a collection of software like GNU/Linux or FreeBSD that is a full fledged system, for single or multiple users or processors. Every thing including the kernel (Linux, HURD, FreeBSD), shell (bash, sh, csh, tcsh), compiler (gcc), office suites (OpenOffice), browsers (Netscape and Mozilla), database servers (PostgreSQL etc), networking applications (apache, sendmail, including general scripting software like PHP, Perl, guile, elisp), graphics applications (gimp), and hundreds of other utilites (tar, bc, cat, less, more) required to serve our needs are available under the GPL or like Licence, with full source code, making it possible to freely share, copy, and modify software for our use. New tools and utilities are created by every new generation of developers, and in the same traditions the software is added with liberty. Free software if free for every user, and for every type of use, personal, commercial or governmental, without any restrictions. Any one can freely share and use Free Software without seeking permission from anyone else. Free means freedom, totally negating the restrictions imposed by proprietary software licenses. For example, a school could use Free Software and freely give copies of the software used to its teachers and pupils without restrictions. Governments could freely use and distribute free software in the welfare of its citizens. Now, proprietary software companies release just a trivial application like a browser free of price and claim to having released "free software". The word "free" here is a misnomer, because, to use this piece of proprietary software, the user should have paid and purchased other components - the kernel, shell, or other systems under a licence from the proprietor. The ingenuius proprietary software licence will carefully give a full working system free of price, without source code, to governments and to educational institutions, just to ensure that the citizens and their children will forced to use proprietary software, and ultimately buy and use their proprietary software in their homes and offices. In reality, the "free" proprietary software is not "free" but merely mis-branded as "free" solely for marketing purposes. [1] Inheriting citizen rights and liberties Free software is freely inherited by the whole global community and society. Every new generation will freely inherit a rich body of code produced by the free software community. With proprietary software, one should always be ready to purchase new licences at the drop of a hat. To keep the free software free for the community, developers who modify the free software source code and release to the public are required to release the modified free software under the same terms of the licence of the original software. The copyright holder of free software can always sue the author who modified the software, for not freely releasing the modifications. This is the only right the author of the software code reserves for himself, just to ensure that future versions of the free software remains free for the whole community. The spirit of the free software movement is all pervasive, and sharing is practically automatic and happily done with grace. [2] member of fraternity for mutual help and brotherly feeling Sharing is free with Free Software. Proprietary software licences restrict sharing, and further will even prosecute for sharing which is even worse. There is an air of fraternity, brotherhood and freedom in the free software community, which is simply unknown in the proprietary software world, where users are chained and tied with a licence that will not allow any sharing or modification. [3] unfettered in action: Free Software may be used freely for commercial, office, home, education, governmental or other purposes. There are no fetters on copying, sale, exhibition, trading or installation of Free Software. With most proprietary software, one has to spend a lot of time studying licence restrictions on using components and literally several practical actions required to use the software itself are fettered in one way or the other. The proprietary software licence may say that even the licenced user can use only one instance on any one computer at any given point of time making realistic practical use of the software cumbersome. [4] open to all comers: Free Software has promoted the principle of equality like never before, and all are welcome to the free software community. With proprietary software, all doors are closed to people who cannot afford to purchase the software. [5] spontaneous, unforced, unearned, gratuitous, willing: The whole free software community acts spontaneously and voluntarily to develop high quality software to add well deserved honour to their names, and willingly and gratuitously give away the software under the GPL or like Licence. These freedoms are not possible or imaginable with proprietary software. [6] voluntary, not concealing one's opinions, blunt Free software is used voluntarily, and enables users to express their opinions about the software plainly and fruitfully in a way promoting the interest of the entire community. If a user finds something amiss, he may set out to correct the fault on his without wasting another moment, and release his work to the public, happy to have been of help. [7] released from difficulty: The souce code for most free software is mostly written in ANSI C, and free software applications can be compiled with gcc using standard procedures. This gives great freedom to port software on to a number of platforms and wide range of hardware, to suit a variety of needs. Proprietary software companies do not release source code, and they cannot be compiled with this kind of freedom, and are often tied to a particular platform, or even worse, to a unique version of a particular operating system. [8] no fees charged Free Software is free of price, if downloaded from Internet, or shared between friends. The truth is that free software is more valuable than being merely available free of cost. Since further copying and trading is free, we can only say Price is Free plus profit if you can earn it. If the same free software is distributed through a "commercial package" the distributor gives the free software for a price greater than zero, which may be the cost of providing warranty cover and other distribution costs of CD/DVD media, printed manuals, packaging, shrink wraps, advertisement and tranportation costs, dealership margins, sometimes at a premium to those who can afford, and other business costs. All users know that the free software included in the commercial package is available at no cost elsewhere, and deliberately chooses to buy a commercial package to suit their convenience or to promote the free software. Some criticize that the cost of implementing and maintaining free software may be as high as proprietary software. This is for a short span of time when documentation and other forms of help have not yet evolved, mostly because free software developers spend most of the time developing the software, and find little time to write elementary manuals. But with time, excellent free online manuals are published, through which a user can learn without spending any money on purchasing documentation or training. One is free to learn through public mailing lists, and even public libraries. Proprietary software companies sometimes give away their software like soap samples, only to promote purchases, and cannot qualify to be free for all the above reasons. Even documentation for proprietary software cannot be shared or freely reproduced. [9] make free, set at liberty: Free Software makes software users free and promotes their liberty in several ways. Proprietary software can do only the opposite. Therefore, while we correctly and meaningfully use the word "free" in Free Software, proprietary software entities use the word "free" without any substantial meaning or content, with overwhelming ambiguity and overapplicability.

2 4

On The Internet Galaxy
by doxa＠sancharnet.in 30 Nov '03

30 Nov '03

Manuel Castell has published a book on The Internet Galaxy, where there are countless references on Free software and other related developments. Great Book from Oxford. CK Raju

1 0

Re: [Fsf-friends] Free without ambiguity and overapplicability
by Manilal K M 30 Nov '03

30 Nov '03

Hello everybody, Actually many words in english may have various different meanings in different context. This is bound to linguistics rather than software or GPL. So is the case with word 'free'. When it cames to software we can use as 'free as in freedom'. But we cannot stop the usage such as 'free with this pack'. because it's a common usage. and I agree with eiidp's view that GNU should focus on the 'GPL concept'. with regards Manilal ----- Original Message ----- From: eiidp <eiidp(a)md3.vsnl.net.in> Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 10:31:19 +0530 To: fsf-friends(a)mm.gnu.org.in Subject: Re: [Fsf-friends] Free without ambiguity and overapplicability > > > Freedom is the noun form of the adjective free. Freedom is derived from > > free. > > The reverse is the fact. And through this only a single meaning of the word > 'free' is evolved. And that same word 'free' is used for various other > purposes. > > > What is needed is curtailment of the abuse of the word "free" by > > proprietary software entities. > > There is no question of abuse, It is a question of common usage which may vary > spatially, sector-wise and cultural-wise. > > > The whole point is that there is little need to explain the correct and > > proper usage by the free software movement. When the words we use exactly > > fit and match our matter at hand, our joy doubles. > > To fit and match it exactly, the explanation should be accompanied. 'Joy' is > a state of mind. This can also be attained if one is prepared to accept > something else. > > The most valuable contribution made by GNU to the society is the concept of > GPL. The war on words contriutes little. > > Regards, > > Anil > > _______________________________________________ > Fsf-friends mailing list > Fsf-friends(a)mm.gnu.org.in > http://mm.gnu.org.in/mailman/listinfo/fsf-friends -- ______________________________________________ Check out the latest SMS services @ http://www.linuxmail.org This allows you to send and receive SMS through your mailbox. Powered by Outblaze

1 0

Hello
by Manilal K M 28 Nov '03

28 Nov '03

Hello everybody I am a new member in fsf-friends Manilal -- ______________________________________________ Check out the latest SMS services @ http://www.linuxmail.org This allows you to send and receive SMS through your mailbox. Powered by Outblaze

1 0

Legal Recourse
by doxa＠sancharnet.in 24 Nov '03

24 Nov '03

Arun, Since the "deal" involves a huge amount, I don't think press releases are enough. Those in power would do anything to get it on. Merely relying on "Opposition" to take up the case also would result in a lost case. When LDF took up the project with M$, it was MM Hassan who voiced against the move from the opposition benches. Now when MM Hassan's team is in power, Achuthanandan is trying to make noices. This cycle would continue. The case would have been different if the civil servants played a sensible role. They too are bothered about losing out on their commission. So why would this nexus try to shed all inhibitions, glory and money to cry for the common man? That would never happen. I think we are now strong enough to plan a legal engagement. CK Raju

1 0

[COMMERCIAL] GNU/Linux CDs available in Goa...
by Frederick Noronha (FN) 23 Nov '03

23 Nov '03

=> Following is a comprehensive listing of the GNU/linux software available => for sharing.. => To place an order for your personal copy and for further info, pls => contact: Aniket Navelkar : aniket <at> gmx.net => Cost of the media Rs 30/- only per CD. Payment mode via Cash, Demand Draft or Money Order. Money has to be paid in advance & the order has to be confirmed via email only. Demand Draft in favor of: Aniket Navelkar, c/o Jegu Senai Navelkar, Near Post Office, Assolna Salcete, GOA - INDIA +---------------------------------------------------------------- | Software | Version | No of CD's | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | RedHat | 6.2 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | RedHat | 9.0 | 3 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Debian Woody | 3.0 | 7 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Mandrake | 7.2 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Mandrake | 8.2 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Mandrake | 9.1 | 3 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Knoppix | 3.2 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Knoppix | 3.3 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | ELX Powerdesk | 1.0 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | ELX Powerdesk | 2.0 | 2 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | GNU Win | 2.1 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Linux in a Teaspoon | | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Free BSD | 5.0 | | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Lindows OS | 4.0.3 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Lindows OS [bootable] | 4.0.4 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Server Optimised Linux [SOL] | | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Dynebolic | 1.03a3 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | The Open CD | | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Free Educ | | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | SUSE LiveEval | 8.1 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Gnoppix | 0.5-3 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Slackware | 9.0 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | RockLinux | 2.0 | 2 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Connectiva | 9.0 | 4 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | ArchLinux | 0.5 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | ArkLinux | | 3 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | GSCP RedHat | v10 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | | | | +---------------------------------------------------------------- => Latest distributions will be added as & when they become available to => us.

1 0

[Fsf-friends] "The free software option" by C. Rammanohar Reddy in "The Hindu"
by Ramanraj K 22 Nov '03

22 Nov '03

"The Hindu" newspaper has published in its issue dated 22nd November, 2003, at page 10, an article titled "The free software option" by C. Rammanohar Reddy This is also available online at: http://www.hindu.com/2003/11/22/stories/2003112200721000.htm

1 0

For the records: OSI forking
by Ramanraj K 21 Nov '03

21 Nov '03

The free software movement forked in 1998 with the open source initiative labelling free software as "open source". We have seen why "open source" is superficial and why it cannot distinguish itself from proprietary software. If the OSI forks again, and continues its "open source" line for businesses, but joins the main stream "free software" movement in actions connected with the law, it would be in the best interests of both the movements and the community. Hence I sent a mail to Mr. Eric Raymond of the OSI. But my mail was rejected as follows: >Your message cannot be delivered to the following recipients: > > Recipient address: esr(a)thyrsus.com > Reason: Server rejected MAIL FROM address. > Diagnostic code: smtp;550 5.0.0 <ramanraj(a)md4.vsnl.net.in>... net.in blocked" Then I sent the contents to osi(a)opensource.org, and the replies revealed that they have also blocked reasoning, which is far worse. Mr. Russell Nelson of the OSI fairly wrote: >Please accept that we'll call it open source, and you'll call it free >software, and that we both mean the same thing. This however missed the concern how the law should call it. Therefore, I replied inviting the attention of Mr. Russell Nelson to this specific issue, which was replied as follows: >Microsoft gives away free software. >... "free software" is inherently confusing. Why do you think >RMS always has to give his free speech/beer footnote? Why do you >think proprietary software companies give away free software? Because >they're our friends? I don't think so. >The solution to all of this nonsense is to establish a certification >mark, which is what we've done. >I don't want to continue this discussion. A "certification mark" assumes discerning users, who might very well distinguish directly between "free software" and "proprietary software", without the aid of a third party certification. Law and software thrive upon building through reasoning, with an open mind, anticipating future scrutiny. Since Mr. Russell Nelson closed the discussion, we are free to ignore the fork that would meet its nemesis on its own. --

1 0

[Fsf-friends] Re: Pitching free software directly before UN and other govt. circles
by Ramanraj K 20 Nov '03

20 Nov '03

Russell Nelson wrote: >Ramanraj K writes: > > understand that both are one and the same to us, from the point of view > > of the copyright law, the expression "free software" makes it plain that > > copying, sale, exhibition, installation, modification, redistribution, > > and trading are "free" with "free software" but these rights are > > "restricted to/by proprietor" in the case of proprietary software. > >Microsoft gives away free software. > > > The availability of source code, price, quality of software, > > development model etc. are qualites that cannot distinguish or > > differentiate our software from proprietary software. It would be > > in the best interests of our community to promote "free software" > > terminology in govt. circles to maintain clarity avoiding needless > > confusion. Hence this request. > >Sorry, but "free software" is inherently confusing. Why do you think >RMS always has to give his free speech/beer footnote? Why do you >think proprietary software companies give away free software? Because >they're our friends? I don't think so. > >The solution to all of this nonsense is to establish a certification >mark, which is what we've done. > >I don't want to continue this discussion. > > > Time alone can bring home the truth.

1 0

[Fsf-friends] Re: Pitching free software directly before UN and other govt. circles
by Ramanraj K 20 Nov '03

20 Nov '03

Russell Nelson wrote: >Ramanraj K writes: > > Would you consider pitching "free software" directly before the UN and > > other government circles? > >Probably not. You're re-opening a battle we don't want to fight. >Please accept that we'll call it open source, and you'll call it free >software, and that we both mean the same thing. > > > Dear Mr. Russell Nelson, You may market "free software" as "open source" to the business community, highlighting one of the basic inherent qualities of free software. The issue is if you would consider pitching "free software" directly as "free software" before the law, to clearly distinguish free software from proprietary software. Please do leisurely read the postings referred. Please do not view this as a fight or battle, between the movements, for our real enemy is proprietary software. Though I understand that both are one and the same to us, from the point of view of the copyright law, the expression "free software" makes it plain that copying, sale, exhibition, installation, modification, redistribution, and trading are "free" with "free software" but these rights are "restricted to/by proprietor" in the case of proprietary software. The availability of source code, price, quality of software, development model etc. are qualites that cannot distinguish or differentiate our software from proprietary software. It would be in the best interests of our community to promote "free software" terminology in govt. circles to maintain clarity avoiding needless confusion. Hence this request. Thanking you, Regards, K. Ramanraj.

1 0

[Fsf-friends] Pitching free software directly before UN and other govt circles
by Ramanraj K 20 Nov '03

20 Nov '03

Dear Mr. Eric Raymond, You would be interested in the following postings at fsf-friends that centered around "free software" vs "open source" terminology: http://gnu.org.in/pipermail/fsf-friends/2003-November/001238.html - I say "FLOSS" is meaningless. http://gnu.org.in/pipermail/fsf-friends/2003-November/001239.html - RMS says "FLOSS" is neutral. http://gnu.org.in/pipermail/fsf-friends/2003-November/001240.html - I say OSI is openly a pitch for marketing free software. http://gnu.org.in/pipermail/fsf-friends/2003-November/001242.html - RMS says "open source" terminology is superficial. http://gnu.org.in/pipermail/fsf-friends/2003-November/001244.html - I wrote why "open-source" cannot distinguish itself from proprietary software. Please see the table there. Then I suggest http://gnu.org.in/pipermail/fsf-friends/2003-November/001245.html - International Free Software Treaty Would you consider pitching "free software" directly before the UN and other government circles? Regards, K. Ramanraj.

1 0

Is an International Free Software Treaty possible?
by Ramanraj K 20 Nov '03

20 Nov '03

Under our laws, as they stand today, open source utterly fails to distinguish itself clearly from proprietary software, and our open source friends are now having a dose of their own medicine with proprietary software companies releasing source code and calling it "open source". Searching the internet for open source will return several links to non-free software claiming to be "open source". "Free" is a very uncomfortable word for proprietary software companies, who will never give users the freedom which free software gives. We cannot contain the free software movement within the confines of copyright law. It would be like trying to contain the ocean within the confines of our fist. The plain fact is that the free software movement has created its own vast expanse of space in the law, at a global scale. Recognition of free software could correctly be done only at a global scale. We are at a defining moment, like when America or India won its freedom. A great vision is needed to proceed and speed ahead in the right direction. If we fail to perceive and understand the significance of the free software movement, we merely push and put away significant progress and development possible with free software. An International Free Software Treaty, may be the first right step in this direction. The treaty may legally recognise the free software movement, its work, its scope and provide for its active use by the people of this world. RMS could be designated as an Ambassador of Free Software, entitled to immunities and privileges under International law. Adequate international funds could also be provided to promote the progress of the free software movement. The UN ought to be seriously interested because the much wider goals and objects of the UN will be well served by the achievements and aims of the focused free software movement.

1 0

Re: Light on Free Software
by Ramanraj K 18 Nov '03

18 Nov '03

> I wonder if we can think of any practical to measures arrest the > spread of "open source" terminology and associated superficial ideas > in government circles? The terminology that the law ought to use, while referring to software that negates the contituents of proprietary software is both interesting and important at this juncture. If governments use the expression "free software" fully understanding the philosophy of the free software movement, this discussion will be redundant. However, our open source friends are good at promoting free software, and now the stage has come when governments have started taking a serious interest in free software as it is of proven quality, open, saves costs, full of freedom desired by all interested in good governance. Since some governments use "open source" terminology, this discussion assumes importance. We have a duty to bring to the notice of governments which use "open source" terminology, the history of the free software movement, and the legal issues involved. The following is a very brief outline, that may be read along with the previous postings touching on this subject. According to the OED, "proprietary" means rights held in private ownership. Initially, only private individuals and entities created software and owned the rights in it. RMS wished to create software that will be free from this kind of private ownership. Free software was therefore a deliberate and intentional movement intended to negate the restrictions and hardships caused by private ownership of software. Now, the issue is: what would be the best expression in law to convey the idea that such software is free from restrictions imposed by private owners? RMS rightly called it "free software" from the time of its very inception. The chief ingredient of Free Software is that it is free from the oppressive and unscientific restrictions imposed by private ownership. The rights in respect of software are chiefly governed by copyright law. As soon as a person writes a software, by law he is vested with copyright over his software, regardless whether it is registered under a Copyright Act. By default all software are proprietary having an identifiable author in whom copyright for the work will vest. Usually, free software produced under the GNU Project is released from private ownership under the terms of the GNU General Public License. The Open Source Initiative started in 1998, chiefly by Eric Raymond, a hacker guru, argued that free software should be labelled as "open source" software. The initiative, has been successful in promoting the interests of free software, but it has also resulted in an acrimonious debate within the community about the logical classification to be adopted while describing software. The classification now competing for attention are: {free | proprietary} software -vs- {open | closed/secret } source software Fundamentally, Copyright law deals with the ownership and transfer of copyrights, and therefore software licences should be classified for the purposes of law only as free or proprietary. Please study the following: 1. Classification of Software Licences in law: software licences +-----------------+-----------------+ | | free proprietary 2. Table of Rights/Properties distinguishing the two classes: --------------------+--------------------+----------------------------- Right/Property Free Software Proprietary Software --------------------+--------------------+----------------------------- Part A: Rights/ingredients of Licence covered by Copyright Law Copying Free Restricted by/to Proprietor Redistribution Free Restricted Exhibition Free Restricted Installation Free Restricted Assignment Free Restricted Modification Free subject to Restricted making the modified version free as source Sale Free Restricted Hire Assignment itself Restricted Free Trading Free Restricted Importing Free Restricted Subsequent ownership Free Restricted Part B: Properties/ingredients not covered by Copyright Law: Avaliability of Free and Open Could be open or closed/secret Source Code Price Free Fancy prices/Cost if Honest /sometimes free for n days, x persons etc /minor software given free as a marketing tool but a whole workable system is never free Development Model Free and Open Restricted and Closed Prone to Virus Well Protected Weakly vulnerable Quality Unmatched ? Growth Potential High ? Documentation Free Restricted In short: sharing Free Restricted --------------------+--------------------+----------------------------- Please note the division of the above table into Part A, covering ingredients covered by Copyright Law and those that are not under Part B. Strictly speaking, the Copyright law does not look at the element of "price" or availability of "source code" at all. Open/Closed source classification further cannot clarify the question of ownership. To use such criteria to classify software licenses would therefore be inappropriate. Songs, movies, and other literary works are "open" and there is nothing secret about a song or literary works in the way, software could have public object code and secretable source code. Even if source code is revealed, the proprietary software could still say that under the terms of licence, it may not be copied or shared. Open/Closed source classification is therefore not appropriate. But we can say free software inherently has the quality of being open source, owing to the very nature of how free software is created and used. In other words, free software is a parent class, and being open souce is just one of its properties, or qualites. Right from its inception, the expression Free Software has meant a negation of all that constituted proprietary software. Software can therefore be intelligibly classified only as free or proprietary, where each class clearly and fully negates the other, for purposes of law. Further, this would be in consonance with the legal traditions of examining words in their historical context and setting. This is good news for our "open source" friends. Since the Open Source Initiative web site openly admits that they are marketing free software, obviously they are merely highlighting one aspect of free software: that its source is always open. Since they are using "open source" label openly as a sales pitch for marketing free software, they can happily continue with the same. However, when it comes to government, they can easily see the reason why law can deal only with free or proprietary software. But it would be ideal if all of us including the law, media, hackers, users and govenments uniformly use the expression "free software" everywhere, to maintain clarity and stand closer to truth. Regards, K. Ramanraj.

1 0

Re [Fsf-friends] Re: Light on Free Software
by doxa＠sancharnet.in 18 Nov '03

18 Nov '03

I wonder if we can think of any practical to measures to arrest the spread of "open source" terminology and associated superficial ideas in government circles? I think after Govt of Kerala's experience of introducing Free Software in Schools, the political leadership has become more aware of the complications within the terminology. The statements of the Opposition Leader of State Assembly of Kerala, issued through Press Release, contained "Free Software" (in The Hindu and "swatantra software" in the Deshabhimani) being used without any ambiguity. This shows that it is only a matter of time before this phrase catches up. CK Raju Thrissur

1 0

Light on Free Software
by Ramanraj K 17 Nov '03

17 Nov '03

I read the article titled "Groping in the dark ... ", by Frederick Noronha, in LINUX For You, November 2003, and thought some light should be thrown. Sorry, there are no links to the article on the world wide web. >The we-don't-need-to-promote-FLOSS attitude can lull everyone into a false sense >of over-confidence. People who could have used this technology effectively simply >don't get a chance to. ... the FLOSS fold has a special responsibility. Free software was born out of the need and necessity to break free from the tyranny and obstacles of proprietary software. Right from its inception, the expression Free Software has meant a negation of all that constituted proprietary software. Software can be intelligibly classified only as free or proprietary, where each class clearly and fully negates the other. The expression FLOSS was used in a survey and study financed under the European Commission's IST programme, which did a case study of Free/Libre Open Source Software, and the work done is available at http://www.infonomics.nl/FLOSS . The FLOSS study was started on June 1, 2001 and terminated on October 31, 2002. The concept of sharing which is innate and elementary in the free software movement, was researched by elaborate questionnaires! The FLOSS study report, while referring to PostgreSQL, says "it is mainly deployed in private use and projects not involving mission-critical business operations", which is plainly wrong. Several goverments and entities are developing live projects using PostgreSQL, that has a rich set of functions not available in even commercial database servers. The "FLOSS survey and study" is a gloss, when all relevant material is already available at www.gnu.org and www.opensource.org. Is FLOSS a technology? The expression FLOSS was used in the emperical study to refer to Free/Libre Open Source Software generally, and cannot be called a "technology". Even if the FLOSS study and report are useful to the European Commission, and to others, it would be no reason to use the expression FLOSS to refer to Free Software. If a new group props up from the community, calling Free Software as Public Software, reasoning that "public" is the best word to convey the intent of GPL, then would there be another study group, that surveys Free/Libre Open Public Source Software - FLOPSS? Would we then seek to replace FLOSS with FLOPSS? This would be endess and meaningless. We need to gracefully accept the historical background that led to the free software movement, and avoid inventing new expressions to maintain clarity and stay focused on the deeper goals and intents of Free Software. Some people freely dip into the Free Software Directory to meet needs, but openly refuse to give credit, or use the expression free software, which is only unfair. >The good thing about the meet is that it's [a symposium in Singapore] >trying to network all the FLOSS initiatives in this part of the globe and put >together a more reliable picture of what's hapenning At present, we can check into globally accessible servers, and download, use, modify, improve, and distribute free software. If spreading the use of free software is itself seen as a project, it would be ideal to adopt the same methods adopted to develop free software, by commencing a project at savannah or sourceforge, so that there can be global access and robust practices evolve. It may be a mere shell script that will download relevant software, and install the same in the user's server and this could keep count and create feedback channels. There are no sound reasons for isolating software use from software development, as both are essentially two sides of the same coin. If Asian projects on i18n, l10n, etc are operated from a few well known CVS foundries, then even persons with access to the internet, living in even remote villages, who clearly understand what is happening can make contributions that are globally relevant. Free software movement has incidentally promoted the principle of equality like never before. >Mastering technology is good but it's more important to be large-hearted when it comes to sharing it I hope that this is a reference to our friends who work for proprietary software. Quite obviously, free software is the ultimate in sharing, and it would be crude to accuse people who have contributed towards free software of not being large-hearted. >We could well convert this into a small self-serving club that doesn't grow ... A friend sent me a copy of Tarka Samgraha by Anambhatta, with its expository gloss on ancient Indian epistemology usually called Nyaya [Realism] + Vaisesika [Atomistic Pluralism]. The Indian works on logic were born, not through any gentle flaming, but through an intense burning desire to get to truth. Modern India's motto is a phrase from the Mundaka Upanishad: Sathyameva Jayethe, translated as "Truth Triumphs". The Upanishads are seen as a clear strarting point for studies on logic, and further works on the methods of arriving at the truth by reasoning developed and evolved gradually. The Nyaya Sutras were written by Gautama. The Vaisesika Sutras were by Kanada. Vatsyayana was the first author who explained the entire scheme of Indian epistemology, however, globally better known today for his Kama Sutra. The Tarka Samgraha is a dipika or commentary on the original older works. The Tarka translation in hand was rendered by Swami Virupakshananda of the Ramakrishna Math, Chennai. The opening quotation is: "Logic and grammar are indispensable aids for every branch of Knowledge". AI applications, even today, do not give grammar the importance it deserves. Long before Stephens drafted the Evidence Act in 1872, we had several works, dealing scientifically and comprehensively with primary evidence, verbal testimony, inference, deduction and these works were actually used in every day life. Nachiketa <-at the doorstep of-> Death, Gautama, Kanada, Vatsyayana, Anambhatta are a few names I have listed here, as associated with Indian epistemology. Now, could we call them as "self-serving" individuals who affixed their names to their works? Their works stand on their own, and we will carry forward the memory of the author along with the work, only if we accept their value. I am convinced they are an invaluable source, atleast, to improve my own Calpp: aided legal procedures and proceedings project. Calpp is the mission of my life, and I make no bones about it. The Calpp project could be seen as self-serving its author Ramanraj, but it could also be seen as serving real human needs. We will gain and grow a lot when Indian epistemology is available as part of free software. Section VII, of the Tarka Samgraha dealing with valid verbal testimony says: "Significative potency is the desire that a certain concept be understood from a certain word." Viewed from this angle, RMS, the founder of the free software movement desired the world to break free from proprietary licences and initiated the free software movement. The whole philosophy and concepts behind the movement stand elegantly loaded on the expression "free software". I hope that all of us can see the significance of the free software movement, and voluntarily use the expression "free software" instead of other expressions. Regards, K. Ramanraj.

2 3

Re: Paths of Freedom
by Ramanraj K 17 Nov '03

17 Nov '03

>The solution should better be called e-Administration. >It received an award from the Deputy Prime Minister of India. >The basic version can be made free. >We can discuss more, if you have any ideas on how to go about it. >Thanks. >Krishnan V D G Congratulations! Please do release your application as free software. www.gnu.org explains how it could be done. Briefly, by free we mean releasing the source code under the GPL. Regards, K. Ramanraj. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ramanraj K" <ramanraj(a)md4.vsnl.net.in> To: <fsf-friends(a)mm.gnu.org.in> Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 10:14 AM Subject: [Fsf-friends] Paths of Freedom >> To, >> Mr. V D G Krishnan >> >> President & CEO >> LL2B.COM Pvt Ltd >> >> >> Dear Mr. V.D.G. Krishnan, >> > > >>> > The message copy received by me is not clear to me. >> >> >> >> First a pointer to where we are: Please visit >> http://gnu.org.in/pipermail/fsf-friends/2003-October >> Ofcourse, we are now in November, but I have given you last month's >> archive address so that you will find your mail listed there at the >> bottom, and you can relate to what is happening around. >> > > >>> >On our part, we have developed a e-governance and e-transparency solution >>> >which is now under trials at Electronics Corporation of Tamilnadu >> >> (ELCOT), >>> >Govt. of Tamilnadu Undertaking. This tool is expected to bring in total >>> >transparency and speed to the working of the Govt. We hope it will be >>> >adopted as a tool by the Govt. of Tamilnadu. >>> > >>> >You can visit WWW.LL2B.COM for the preliminary details. >> >> >> >> e-governance and e-transparency solutions are most welcome. But then, >> the solution itself should also be free, open and transparent. The >> philosophy section at http://www.gnu.org explains free software. Law >> itself is public, free and open in nature. Our Supreme Court had the >> occasion in Naresh v. State of Maharashtra [AIR 1967 SC 1] to consider >> the merits of open and public trials for "healthy objective and fair >> administration of justice," and quoted Bentham with approval as follows: >> >> "In the darkness of secrecy, sinister interest, and evil in every >> shape, have full swing. ... Publicity is the very soul of justice. >> It is the keenest spur to exertion, and the surest of all guards >> against improbity. It keeps the Judge himself while trying under >> trial in the sense that the security of securities is publicity." >> >> The principles laid are equally true for governance. Without free >> software, it is hard to even imagine a e-governance software. >> >> But, I am personally wary of using the expression "e-governance software". >> >> The law is the common background for all human activity. Besides >> governance, law operates upon a large area. Governance is specially >> grouped under the heading Constitutional Law and Administrative Law. We >> have Law of Contracts, Torts, Law of Property, Family Law, Labour Law >> etc. wherein "governance" is minimal or even totally absent. If an >> application can handle Constitutional Law and Administrative Law, then >> there are no reasons why it should not handle the Law of Contracts or >> the other laws. We have people designing "banking software", "insurance >> software", "billing software", as though the law has these water tight >> compartments. We have ERP, CRM, B2B, B2C, G2G, G2B, etc. etc, with >> others promising to integrate ERP with CRM, CRM with the rest in all >> possible permutations and combinations. It makes business sense but no >> legal sense. >> >> Can any e-governance software check constitutionality of code? If they >> can't, then they better not call themselves by such a name. >> >> Besides, consider the following: >> >> Suppose an e-governance application wants to assist litigants in filing >> plaints. While automating preparation of plaints, some issues arise. >> If more than one plaintiff sues, the script should use "plaintiffs" >> otherwise, "plaintiff". In appeals, for the same reason it chooses >> between "appellants" and "appellant". Soon, a function that would give >> the plural for singular nouns like applicant, petitioner, claimant, >> defendant, and respondent becomes necessary. This exercise soon takes >> one to examining the rules of English grammar. If an application can >> handle legal rules well, then it might handle rules of English grammar >> as well. But the most singular difficulty would be in listing the rules >> of English grammar. Tamil has Agathiam (the primary grammar text, but >> no longer in vogue) > Tholkappiam (Secondary text, based on Agathiam), >> and > finally the recent Nanool, where everything from how letters are >> formed, classified, pronounced, to usage, root words, verbs, >> concatanation, and every thing necessary to use the language are dealt >> with thoroughly. Assuming that after consensus, acceptable rules of >> English grammar for the present are available, we could write functions >> such as: >> >> function get_plural($singlular){ >> // returns plural for a given singular >> .... >> } >> >> To write a perfect get_plural function, we need to know if the word >> passed to the function is a noun or not. Now, we have to write >> >> function is_noun($word){ >> // returns if word is a noun >> .... >> } >> >> >> As you see, one thing leads to another, and soon we will have a large >> library of functions that deal with many aspects of English grammar. >> Then our scripts will write well, and may be read well too. >> >> Once we write such a library, there is no reason why this should be >> confined to just an "e-governance" application. We could use it even >> better in the field of education or wherever English is used. >> >> Consider another scenario. >> >> Recently, an ONGC helicopter crashed into the sea near Mumbai, and an >> Enquiry has been ordered into it. The survivor & eye witnesses reported >> that the helicopter went into a spin before crashing into the sea. It >> is well known that the tail propellor prevents a helicopter from >> spinning. Did the tail propellor fail? We see that the enquiry soon >> has to deal with the basic workings of an helicopter to arrive at the >> truth for the cause of the accident. Though at the top level, things >> look like "e-governance", as we go deep, we find ourselves into the >> thick of rules of English grammar, the laws of aerodynamics, history, or >> other fields of human knowledge. >> >> Ancient sages dealt exhaustively on grammar, philosophy, ethics, >> medicine, law, science and literature single handedly. Agathiar wrote >> Agathiam creating a script for Tamil, codifing the rules of grammar, and >> then dealt with medicine [Paripooranam 400], and initiated Girivalam, as >> the simplest form of yoga, that could be practiced by one and all. >> Agathiar is believed to have brought his first love, River Cauvery, to >> Tamil Nadu. Well, then he might have organised the flow of the River >> with the aid of the local kings. Patanjali wrote upon Sanskrit Grammar, >> Ayurveda and Yoga, and though the works stand distinctively, a common >> thread unites them. A unity at some point is required for scientific >> progress and human prosperity. >> >> Free software offers all the tools we can ask for. The next big step >> would be when human knowlege is ported across so that software >> applications abound with life, intelligence and wisdom. >> >> Regards, >> K. Ramanraj. >

1 0

LFY Nov 2003 * GNU/Linux updates from India ...
by Frederick Noronha (FN) 14 Nov '03

14 Nov '03

-------------------------------LINUX FOR YOUR Nov 2003 ----------------- Published from India, Vol 1 No 9 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Would you like to contribute articles to LFY? Contact Rahul Chopra below ------------------------------------------------------------------------ EDITORIAL: Star Office & is the latest version of (Sun's) office suite software. We tried it on both Windows and Linux -- and were impressed by its performance and features... Sun has given its battle cry against Microsoft. And, it couldn't be louder. The attach is on three fronts -- the office suite, the operating system and the enterprise server solution. -- Rahul Chopra LFYedit at efyindia.com * Fedora project updates * Kernel 2.6.0-test8 released * Slackware 9.1 arrives * Knoppix 3.3 is here * Linux device remote-controls UPS * SuSE Linux 9.0 released * New features to keep off worms * Samba 3.0 released * Athlon64 debuts * Mandrake Linux 9.2 launched * Linux-based digital media player rolls out * Novell connects Linux desktop users to MSExchange 2003 * XFce 4.0 lightweight desktop environment launched Major updates and releases: ClusterKnoppix v.3.2.2003-09-05-EN * DietLinux v0.1.2 * dyne:bolic v.1.0 * GNOPPIX v.0.5.4-1 * Mailman v 2.1.3 * Chandler IN INDIA a government program in the large state of Madhya Pradesh aims at providing computer-enabled education and teaching basic computer skills to students in primary and middle schools. The unique project harnesses the power of [GNU]Linux-based open source software. Stellar data recovery tool: Stellar Phoenix is a GNU/Linux data recovery tool that runs from Windows. It does a good job of recvering data, but comes at a price. If you manage a network of Linux desktops, then this is a must-have tool for you. CONTEST: Offer a good slogan and win a gold-plated watch. FEW C/C++ competitors exist for GCC in the world of GNU/Linux. Intel's C++ Compiler 7.0 is one such brave-heart. It fails GCC at some points, but by optimising code for faster performance, it has proved its worth. BhavyaOS: This CD which comes from the magazine promises "all the Red Hat 9 goodies compressed on a single CD". Feedback from users? Some problems have been reported in the past. INDIA MAY NOT be topping the charts in high performance computing. But with software and hardware costs dipping, a number of research organisations and government agencies are now deploying high performance clusters for innovative applications. OpenOffice WRITE HAS features that can help you track changes and save different versions of the same document, when you are working on it with others. OpenOffice Calc, a spreadsheet app, is filled with functions. How to use some of these functions is explained here. * Motorola and Real tie-up for Linux-phones * Samsung to develop Linux smart phones * SuSE to launch US$449 Linux server for small businesses * Criticism leads to Forrester policy change (towards vendor -sponsored research, following publication of a controversial Microsoft-funded study comparing the costs of Linux) * Analyst company disagrees with Sun's Linux strategy * Dell stands up for new Red Hat Linux * Windows developers feel Linux is more secure, as per study * Telstra selects Sun's Mad Hatter (Linux desktop) * Thai schools desert Microsoft products * Tetra Information Services is first partner for Linux Asia 2004 * HP to back Linux byers * Red Hat widens software choice * Linux users furious over Royal Bank SCO investment * Linux not accountable for security, Microsoft's Ballmer says * Ford mulling over change to Linux-based servers * SCO postpones deadline for taking Linux licences * More governments adopt Linux * NTT to link up with OSDL to develop Linux for telecom use INDIAN TRANSPORT sector treads cautiously on the Linux road. Most transport operators acknowledge the role of Linux-based software not only in cost cutting, but also in offering customers a better experience. However, investment costs, lack of support and knowhow are concerns of potential GNU/Linux users in this sector. IN INDIA, ON THE enterprise desktop front, many enterprises use Linux to manage crucial systems. But no IT decision-maker wants to place it on the desktop of the knowledge worker. Why is it so? FINLAND WORKS ON AN APPLIED Linux Institute: Three Finnish public institutions, including Linux Torvalds' alma mater, are setting up an institute for applied Linux, so that people can use and share open systems, which could also help create an environment empowering poeple in the North and the South. BHARTI TELETECH LTD decided to streamline its business processes, and so opted for GNU/Linux. The change not only saved costs but was easier to migrate to. The Bharti Group followed up by upgrading its other Microsoft-run systems to Linux as well. (CON)FIGURING OUT the IBM Directory Server (hands-on) SEVEN STEPS to software samadhi: Migration from Windows to GNU/Linux may take some time, but the process will be a great learning experience. And 'muft' (free-of-cost) and 'mukt' (freedom-based) software could be the best reward for your efforts, writes Linux Lingam. Don't ask what the pseudonym means! TIPS & TRICKS on networking: simple steps that will make you a pro at deploying firewalls, setting up NAT and even working with IP tunnelling. (Elaborate five-page how-to). GNUWinII CD: FREE YOUR WINDOWS> A review of the GNU WinII CD, which has a collection of free/libre and open source software for the Windows platform. Written by Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay. PARALLEL PROCESSING using Perl. You can write programs in Perl that run in parallel to carry out computationally-intensive tasks through two models, the process model and the threads model. KERNEL CORNER reviews the concept of the semaphore mechanism and demonstrates its application in a kernel program. Various kernel semaphore functions are discussed in detail. BOOKS REVIEWED IN BRIEF: * Assembly Language Step-By-Step: Programming with DOS and Linux, Rs 369 with CD, pp 613 * Linux Database Bible Rs 329 in India, pp 715 * Professional Red Hat Linux 9 Secrets Rs 499 with 2 CDs in India. Pp 1038 * Linux in Easy Steps, Rs 89, pp 186 * Beginning Red Hat Linux 9. Rs 379 with 2 CDs, Pp 570 SHELL CORNER: Learn more script features and functions to better control signals and processes. JAVA TIPS FOR your Linux PDA. Learn how to load and run a simple Java application on Sharp's SL-series Zaurus, the Linux-based PDA. FIREWALLING USING ipTABLES: Here's how to use iptables in Netfilter to guard your computer from intruders. GROPING IN THE DARK: Mastering technology is good, but it's more important to be large-hearted when it comes to sharing it, says the BraveGNUIndia column. NEWS FROM INDIA includes * Linare Linux Launched * Wind River releases tools for embedded Linux * Oracle rools out entry-level database for SMEs * Sun rolls out StarOffice 7.0 * IBM launches Lotus Notes and Domino 6.5 * Cadence moves PCB tools to Linux * Sun Microsystems launches Mad Hatter * First Indian distro with bio-informatics tools * Cincom Smalltalk VisualWorks environment for GNU/Linux THE PHD CHAMBER of Commerce and Industry and Tetra Information Services organised an all-day seminar on Linux Readiness: Emergence of a New Era in September at New Delhi. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ LINUX ASIA meets in Delhi on Feb 11-13. See you there... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ CONTACTS: LFY Delhi 26810602 or 26810603 http://www.linuxforu.com

1 0

Asian first-timers prefer GNU/Linux to Windows
by Frederick Noronha (FN) 14 Nov '03

14 Nov '03

ENTERPRISE Unix Roundup: A Linux Pioneer Gets Back in the Game Sever Watch, United States Last week we took a look at SUSE and Red Hat, two long-time Linux stalwarts entering distinctly new phases. This week, another Linux ... <http://www.serverwatch.com/news/article.php/3108641> ASIAN first-timers prefer Linux to Windows The Register, UK >From a report at Linux Insider, we learn why. First-time computer users are flocking to a government-subsidised programme to bring cheap PCs to the public. ... <http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/33963.html> OSDL To Start Pushing on Desktop Linux Slashdot ... Review is reporting that 'IBM, Red Hat and a consortium of computer makers backed by the likes of Dell, Hewlett-Packard and Intel will push to move the Linux ... <http://slashdot.org/articles/03/11/13/121205.shtml?tid=126&tid=152&tid=163&…> EMBEDDED Linux specialist SnapGear acquired by high-end firewall ... Linux News One of the world's first embedded Linux companies has just announced that it is being acquired (again). Embedded Linux security ... CyberGuard to Acquire SnapGear, Extending Product Line to Edge of ... <http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS9335598499.html> ALCATEL to develop Linux 3G services Cellular-News Alcatel and Intel have signed a Memorandum of Understanding to jointly promote advanced mobile Internet applications using a Linux operating environment in ... <http://www.cellular-news.com/story/10105.shtml> WIN4LIN support announced for Fedora Linux Desktop Linux NeTraverse announced the immediate availability of Win4Lin for Fedora Linux. Win4Lin allows users to bridge from legacy Windows ... <http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS6351767204.html> LINUX operating system secures place on Middle East's technology ... AME Info, United Arab Emirates Industry evidence suggests that there has been a significant rise in the number of companies in the Middle East investigating the potential advantages of Linux ... <http://www.ameinfo.com/news/Detailed/31146.html> NOVELL'S Masie to Focus On Linux, Upliftment AllAfrica.com, Africa ... SA is a country with massive potential, saying he has big plans for the company and is really excited about the possibilities for the organisation's Linux ... <http://allafrica.com/stories/200311130514.html> REPORT: Visitors to Linux World Frankfurt Give KDE A Thumbs Up KDE.NEWS Continuing the successful run of trade show presences, the KDE team used the opportunity of this year's Linux World Expo and Conference in Frankfurt, Germany ... Desktop Linux Consortium Conference debuts - NewsForge Perens predicts desktop surge, promotes user-driven enterprise ... <http://dot.kde.org/1068663688/> BMC execs talk mainframe Linux at zSeries Expo Search390.com, United States Search390.com recently had the chance to discuss the past, present and future of Linux on the mainfame with two BMC Software executives. ... <http://search390.techtarget.com/qna/0,289202,sid10_gci936627,00.html>

1 0

Red Hat Fedora available on Asian mirror
by Imran William Smith 06 Nov '03

06 Nov '03

If anybody is having trouble downloading RedHat Fedora, the community side of the recent split in the Red Hat product line, it is mirrored at AsiaOSC, our mirror in Malaysia. Download it here: http://mymirror.asiaosc.org/redhat/fedora/linux/core/1/i386/iso/ or read the full article here: There seems to be a problem with many Red Hat mirrors - it seems Red Hat has deliberately made Fedora outside their normal ftp structure, to make it clear to the public that it's not 'just another Red Hat release'. The downside of this is that all mirrors are likely to have to edit their sync scripts, so the project will take longer than usual to appear on mirrors. Imran William Smith imran(a)imran.info / iwsmith(a)mimos.my Asian Open Source Centre, Malaysia http://www.asiaosc.org

1 0

Paths of Freedom
by Ramanraj K 05 Nov '03

05 Nov '03

To, Mr. V D G Krishnan President & CEO LL2B.COM Pvt Ltd Dear Mr. V.D.G. Krishnan, > The message copy received by me is not clear to me. First a pointer to where we are: Please visit http://gnu.org.in/pipermail/fsf-friends/2003-October Ofcourse, we are now in November, but I have given you last month's archive address so that you will find your mail listed there at the bottom, and you can relate to what is happening around. >On our part, we have developed a e-governance and e-transparency solution >which is now under trials at Electronics Corporation of Tamilnadu (ELCOT), >Govt. of Tamilnadu Undertaking. This tool is expected to bring in total >transparency and speed to the working of the Govt. We hope it will be >adopted as a tool by the Govt. of Tamilnadu. > >You can visit WWW.LL2B.COM for the preliminary details. e-governance and e-transparency solutions are most welcome. But then, the solution itself should also be free, open and transparent. The philosophy section at http://www.gnu.org explains free software. Law itself is public, free and open in nature. Our Supreme Court had the occasion in Naresh v. State of Maharashtra [AIR 1967 SC 1] to consider the merits of open and public trials for "healthy objective and fair administration of justice," and quoted Bentham with approval as follows: "In the darkness of secrecy, sinister interest, and evil in every shape, have full swing. ... Publicity is the very soul of justice. It is the keenest spur to exertion, and the surest of all guards against improbity. It keeps the Judge himself while trying under trial in the sense that the security of securities is publicity." The principles laid are equally true for governance. Without free software, it is hard to even imagine a e-governance software. But, I am personally wary of using the expression "e-governance software". The law is the common background for all human activity. Besides governance, law operates upon a large area. Governance is specially grouped under the heading Constitutional Law and Administrative Law. We have Law of Contracts, Torts, Law of Property, Family Law, Labour Law etc. wherein "governance" is minimal or even totally absent. If an application can handle Constitutional Law and Administrative Law, then there are no reasons why it should not handle the Law of Contracts or the other laws. We have people designing "banking software", "insurance software", "billing software", as though the law has these water tight compartments. We have ERP, CRM, B2B, B2C, G2G, G2B, etc. etc, with others promising to integrate ERP with CRM, CRM with the rest in all possible permutations and combinations. It makes business sense but no legal sense. Can any e-governance software check constitutionality of code? If they can't, then they better not call themselves by such a name. Besides, consider the following: Suppose an e-governance application wants to assist litigants in filing plaints. While automating preparation of plaints, some issues arise. If more than one plaintiff sues, the script should use "plaintiffs" otherwise, "plaintiff". In appeals, for the same reason it chooses between "appellants" and "appellant". Soon, a function that would give the plural for singular nouns like applicant, petitioner, claimant, defendant, and respondent becomes necessary. This exercise soon takes one to examining the rules of English grammar. If an application can handle legal rules well, then it might handle rules of English grammar as well. But the most singular difficulty would be in listing the rules of English grammar. Tamil has Agathiam (the primary grammar text, but no longer in vogue) > Tholkappiam (Secondary text, based on Agathiam), and > finally the recent Nanool, where everything from how letters are formed, classified, pronounced, to usage, root words, verbs, concatanation, and every thing necessary to use the language are dealt with thoroughly. Assuming that after consensus, acceptable rules of English grammar for the present are available, we could write functions such as: function get_plural($singlular){ // returns plural for a given singular .... } To write a perfect get_plural function, we need to know if the word passed to the function is a noun or not. Now, we have to write function is_noun($word){ // returns if word is a noun .... } As you see, one thing leads to another, and soon we will have a large library of functions that deal with many aspects of English grammar. Then our scripts will write well, and may be read well too. Once we write such a library, there is no reason why this should be confined to just an "e-governance" application. We could use it even better in the field of education or wherever English is used. Consider another scenario. Recently, an ONGC helicopter crashed into the sea near Mumbai, and an Enquiry has been ordered into it. The survivor & eye witnesses reported that the helicopter went into a spin before crashing into the sea. It is well known that the tail propellor prevents a helicopter from spinning. Did the tail propellor fail? We see that the enquiry soon has to deal with the basic workings of an helicopter to arrive at the truth for the cause of the accident. Though at the top level, things look like "e-governance", as we go deep, we find ourselves into the thick of rules of English grammar, the laws of aerodynamics, history, or other fields of human knowledge. Ancient sages dealt exhaustively on grammar, philosophy, ethics, medicine, law, science and literature single handedly. Agathiar wrote Agathiam creating a script for Tamil, codifing the rules of grammar, and then dealt with medicine [Paripooranam 400], and initiated Girivalam, as the simplest form of yoga, that could be practiced by one and all. Agathiar is believed to have brought his first love, River Cauvery, to Tamil Nadu. Well, then he might have organised the flow of the River with the aid of the local kings. Patanjali wrote upon Sanskrit Grammar, Ayurveda and Yoga, and though the works stand distinctively, a common thread unites them. A unity at some point is required for scientific progress and human prosperity. Free software offers all the tools we can ask for. The next big step would be when human knowlege is ported across so that software applications abound with life, intelligence and wisdom. Regards, K. Ramanraj. Apologies for replying so late. >On our part, we have developed a e-governance and e-transparency solution >which is now under trials at Electronics Corporation of Tamilnadu (ELCOT), >Govt. of Tamilnadu Undertaking. This tool is expected to bring in total >transparency and speed to the working of the Govt. We hope it will be >adopted as a tool by the Govt. of Tamilnadu. > >You can visit WWW.LL2B.COM for the preliminary details. > > > >(044) 5211 5995 >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Ramanraj K" <ramanraj(a)md4.vsnl.net.in> >To: <fsf-friends(a)mm.gnu.org.in> >Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 6:57 PM >Subject: [Fsf-friends] Celebrate with free software > > > > >>Dear Countrymen, >> >>There is perhaps no other nation that remembers and celebrates freedom >>as much as we do. Diwali reminds us about the the end of the cruel >>demon, who finally wished that we rejoice his gory conquest and the >>triumph of freedom, with sweets and festivities. Free software is yet >>another reason we have to celebrate, not once a year but every moment >>of consciousness. It heralds in an era when we can find freedom from >>the modern day demons of corruption, concoction, commission, >>collection, concession, capitation, congestion, cunningmen, >>chickenmen, and cynicalmen. We could call all these together as c10n. >>This is c10n - version 1.0, updates are welcome! >> >>Regards, >>K. Ramanraj. >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Fsf-friends mailing list >>Fsf-friends(a)mm.gnu.org.in >>http://mm.gnu.org.in/mailman/listinfo/fsf-friends >> >> >> > > > >

1 0

[Fwd: design + linux]
by Arun M 03 Nov '03

03 Nov '03

Hi LL, For DTP you may also look into this. http://www.stacken.kth.se/project/pptout/ regards, arun. -- Arun M <arun(a)gnu.org.in> FSF India

1 0

Smart card based solution provider.
by H S Rai 01 Nov '03

01 Nov '03

Is there not good professionals or firms who can provide Free/Open-source based solution using smart card? If any one knows, please let me know or if there is some other mailing list or News-group for such firms/vendors, which may provide service in North India, I would like to know that. Why I am asking this? Following is the reason. One State Government issued open tender for such a project to be implemented for all technical Institutions in the state. As per my knowledge, no one is there with Free/Open-source based solution. All are M$ based. I would like to take up the issue with State Government, but only if some one is there who can provide such a solution. -- H.S.Rai http://www.grex.org/~hsrai | Registered Linux User # 223684 http://counter.li.org/cgi-bin/runscript/display-person.cgi?user=223684 Try to get all of your posthumous medals in advance.

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

Fsf-friends November 2003