| Linus and Darl Tell Different Stories: Who Is Telling the Truth? |
| Friday, April 02 2004 @ 06:26 PM EST |
|
I'll bet you thought the article yesterday by eWeek's Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols was an April Fool's joke, didn't you? Especially the part where in his interview with McBride and Sontag, McBride said that Linus didn't want to see the allegedly infringing code because he was afraid of becoming "tainted": "McBride: I talked to Linus [Torvalds] in an e-mail exchange last summer, and I told him I was willing to show him the code. But he said he didn't want to see it because he didn't want to be tainted by it. So, there's this attitude of we want to show it, but we don't see it." Today, Linus states unequivocably that he did want to see the code, but they required an onerous NDA:
"'Real life happens to be different,' Torvalds said. 'My e-mail to Darl on May 30 of last year states: "I would also like to know exactly what it is you allege is problematic in the kernel, but judging by the press reports I don't think you'll answer me on that. Maybe you _can_ answer the confusion about me personally, though."
Once again, it's SCO telling one story and the free/open source world telling another. Who is telling the truth?
"The SCO Group has shown off a few hundred lines of Linux code that allegedly violates its rights to Unix but won't allow Linus Torvalds--the father of Linux--to take a peek without signing a non-disclosure agreement. Are you surprised that Linus is telling the truth here and McBride isn't? Then you need to read Groklaw more often. Just last week, we brought to your attention that Linus told Information Week that open source keeps you honest. We could use a few more volunteers to keep the QDB up-to-date. I'm thinking it might come in handy for IBM and Red Hat and everyone at trial, when certain folks are on the stand telling stories. |
|
||||