On Jan 5, 2008 12:53 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:

quoted text
> 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables

>    running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as

>    such de-incentivates the creation of replacements.

> 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence.

It makes good sense to establish principles and stick to them. It

makes sense that different people have different principles and will

criticize one another on the basis of them. But I think it is

important to recognize that what furthers adoption of free software

over non-free software is complicated and does not seem to follow from

any simple rule. For instance, it seems to you that the Wine project

is counter-productive. But the Wine project is inseparable from

winelib. If you're not already familiar with winelib, check it

out--then I'd be curious to know if you still think the Wine project

is counterproductive, considering that there are many free

applications that are Windows-only for technical reasons arising out

of decisions made early in their development.
Separately from this, Wine enables people who retain Windows for a few

applications to switch over entirely to other operating systems. How

do you balance this effect against your suggested effect of

discouraging development of free replacements to software? What would

you need to know to actually know that Wine was ultimately

counterproductive, or ultimately productive? When it comes right down

to it, a lot of the arguments about what do and will have what effect

don't stand up unless supported with statistical evidence. This is the

sort of thing you could publish a paper on, or maybe a book. But there

is no reason for anybody to buy any argument about what specific kinds

of free software encourage adoption of free software that doesn't

provide something approaching hard evidence.
It is one thing to say that there is a way for a project to be run

that is most ethical. It is another to say that this will have the

most ethical effects in the long run. There is no reason to believe

that what has the best effects in the long run is necessarily the

right thing, but then again, if it turns out that the "ethical" thing

usually leads to unethical results in the long run, it is worth

examining one's ethics.
-Eliah