From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4A8A6C for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 15:44:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hr2.samba.org (hr2.samba.org [144.76.82.148]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2CBF2ED for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 15:44:10 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2016 08:43:56 -0700 From: Jeremy Allison To: Theodore Ts'o Message-ID: <20160828154356.GA16414@jeremy-acer> Reply-To: Jeremy Allison References: <20160826193331.GA29084@jra3> <87inunxf14.fsf@ebb.org> <20160827162655.GB27132@kroah.com> <87bn0dnc6f.fsf@ebb.org> <1472348609.2440.37.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20160828042454.GA8742@jeremy-acer> <20160828125542.7oejzcbpeozkrq3k@thunk.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160828125542.7oejzcbpeozkrq3k@thunk.org> Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, .jra@samba.org, James Bottomley , "Bradley M. Kuhn" , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] GPL defense issues List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 08:55:42AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > For the record, I believe there can be a case for the shiny red > button. I just want Linus, and not the SFC (or some --- as admitted > by the SFC --- minority set of developers), to be the one who decides > when it's appropriate to push it. > > I've said it before, and I've said it again. For me, this is much > more about a project governance issue. We don't let random pissed off > army officers decide when to start World War III... Ted, there is a massive inconsistency here. For decisions on legal action you want a top-town, corporate power structure - with only authorized management making decisions on when and how to proceed. But for the project as a whole Linus has clearly said he expects self-interest to govern peoples actions. *You can't have it both ways* ! If self interest governs peoples actions in joining in the project, then self interest also governs their activities in enforcing the license. What you seem to have trouble with is that other contributors have *different* self-interests to you when it comes to enforcement. You don't agree, and that's fine. But you can't control what other people chose to do, just like you can't control if they decide to participate in the project or not. People will do what they feel is in their own self-interest - just as you are doing here.