zlacker

>>elikog+(OP)
Dolstra nailed it:

> It is my opinion that it is not for us, as open source software developers, to decide whose views are valid and whose are not, and to allow or disallow project or conference participation as a result.

You really should not be in open source if you believe it is your purview to ideologically police the usage and contribution to your software. That notion is incompatible with the spirit of the endeavor.

>>ordina+La
Stallman covered this in a (IMHO) very well thought out article: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/programs-must-not-limit-freed...

His article is specifically about pretend free/open source licenses that restrict what software can be used for. But the conclusion applies to similar behaviors around the entire free/open source ecosystem like conferences: it will just drive participants away and strengthen the position of proprietary solutions instead.

>>Hideou+Nc
Bridging Stallman's article to the issue at hand of sponsorship, I find it hard to believe that because he's fine with say Oracle using his code that he would also be fine with giving them a platform as a sponsor.

I don't actually know his position on this, but mean to communicate I see the use of free software and the sponsorship issue as separate issues.

>>Pareto+of
You've already commented ten times in this thread. If you don't know, maybe don't say anything?

>>powera+Nf
Do you know if Stallman would platform Oracle by allowing them to be a sponsor?