Subject: Re: [bug#45692] Gaslighting

From: Maxime Devos <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2021 14:22:12 +0200

Mason Loring Bliss schreef op do 02-09-2021 om 17:24 [-0400]:
> Maxime writes,
>   
>     > The GPL violation is very unfortunate. It would have been nice to
>     > have some ZFS support in Guix.
> 
> There is no GPL violation. Gaslighting in an attempt to sabotage the
> adoption of high-quality free software is somewhat poor form and not at all
> useful.

Indeed, gaslighing is poor form and not at all useful.  But why are you suggesting
I'm gaslightling here?  Did you just read these last two sentences of the e-mail?
If you read all of it, you'd have seen my explanation of why I believe there's
a GPL violation, and two relevant links to articles by SFLC and FSF. 

Also see IRC logs:
https://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2021-09-02.log
https://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2021-09-03.log

While ultimately it's a matter for the courts to decide on,
I believe I've reasonable grounds to believe it's a GPL violation
and explained why, so I don't see any gaslightling here.

And I'm not ‘sabotaging’ anything.  In fact, I'm _helping_ adoption of ZFS,
by reviewing the patch and giving some suggestions.  There is just the practical
problem of the in-my-eyes probable GPL violation (your opinion on whether it's
a GPL violation might vary).

> To be clear, the one singular thing that would be a GPL violation would be
> Guix building Linux with ZFS built in and then distributing that binary.
> Users can build ZFS into their kernels and use them and that's fine as long
> as they don't distribute them. Guix can script this to make it easy for
> users to build ZFS into their kernels and that would not be a violation.
> The only possible violation is distribution of a binary Linux kernel with
> ZFS compiled into it.

See the previous mail and the IRC logs for why I find this reasoning rather
flimsy.

> Hope that helps.

No, your libel about ‘Maxime is gaslighting’ doesn't help.  And your paragraph
about why you think there's no GPL violation here is nothing I haven't read before.

I probably won't be reading and replying to your mails anymore.

Bye,
Maxime