Re: [GNU-linux-libre] gnu.org "Free GNU/Linux distributions" list updates

[Jean Louis]

On Sat, Aug 05, 2017 at 09:24:13PM +0200, Henry Jensen wrote:
> Hello Jean,
> 
> Am Sat, 5 Aug 2017 21:14:04 +0300
> schrieb Jean Louis <address@hidden>:
> 
> > > To be honest, I found the whole procedure of  becoming an endorsed
> > > distro non-transparent. 
> > >  
> > 
> > I have read these pages here:
> > 
> > https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html
> > 
> > and
> > 
> > https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html
> > 
> > and there is email on how to contact FSF, and FSF
> > is responsive, so I see that whole procedure is
> > very transparent.
> 
> 
> Yes, it is clear how to contact: "please write to <address@hidden>"
> 
> However, it is not very clear what happens next. How the distro is
> reviewed, what steps are involved. 
> 
> The page states: "When you do, we'll explain more about our evaluation
> process to you, and get started on it quickly."
> 
> Well, they didn't when I contacted them some years ago.
> And why explain it only privately, why not public for
> anyone to see? That is what I call non-transparent. 
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> Henry


Good day Henry,

I know there is email address for licensing,
webmasters are webmasters.

If somebody does not answer back, just call by
phone, send fax, letter, send the email again,
contact RMS, there is no guarantee that email
arrived if you just send it. Make sure it arrives
and then you can say that delay is long.

I always make sure of any important communication
that I know first, for sure, that my communication
arrived.

My feeling is that your opinion of "having hidden
agendae is not substantiated.

Copy of email goes to RMS.

Another thing:

When preparing any application, you do not want to
give a burden to the reviewer, you want to prepare
and demonstrate those factors that reviewer wants
to see.

For example, if you are using Linux libre, you
should state it so, and not wait for reviewer to
find it out hyrself.

Maybe you want to demonstrate what you changed in
the Linux libre kernel.

My suggestion is to follow the guidelines, and
then to demonstrate exactly what is written in
guidelines, and not just ask for reviewer to do
the huge job of reviewing without giving proper
report on what you have done.

I have reviewed the website
https://connochaetos.org/wiki/imprint and I see it
shall be fully free Operating System, KISS
principle, very nice, that is how I like it.

Excellent project!

Sehr gut, viel Arbeit gemacht!

Apart from those already endorsed distributions,
in my opinion, the new distributions shall have
better list of packages, to quickly compare the
packages or software with already known libre
issues in other distributions.

I could not find a list of packages or software
that Conochaet OS is distributing. Maybe you can
send me the list? Or maybe you can quickly create
a page with such list?

On your website, I would also prefer to see more
explanation on 4 freedoms and meaning of free
software, so that website teaches people.

You and me, we know what is free software, new
people do not necessarily know it.

I also did not see much references to licenses.

When I read guidelines, I also do not see the
option, or clear and specific way to report
problems of nonfree software that is found
eventually. Something like a bug tracking.

"ttps://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html
> > 
> > and there is email on how to contact FSF, and FSF
> > is responsive, so I see that whole procedure is
> > very transparent.
> 
> 
> Yes, it is clear how to contact: "please write to <address@hidden>"
> 
> However, it is not very clear what happens next. How the distro is
> reviewed, what steps are involved. 
> 
> The page states: "When you do, we'll explain more about our evaluation
> process to you, and get started on it quickly."
> 
> Well, they didn't when I contacted them some years ago.
> And why explain it only privately, why not public for
> anyone to see? That is what I call non-transparent. 
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> Henry


Good day Henry,

I know there is email address for licensing,
webmasters are webmasters.

If somebody does not answer back, just call by
phone, send fax, letter, send the email again,
contact RMS, there is no guarantee that email
arrived if you just send it. Make sure it arrives
and then you can say that delay is long.

I always make sure of any important communication
that I know first, for sure, that my communication
arrived.

My feeling is that your opinion of "having hidden
agendae is not substantiated.

Copy of email goes to RMS.

Another thing:

When preparing any application, you do not want to
give a burden to the reviewer, you want to prepare
and demonstrate those factors that reviewer wants
to see.

For example, if you are using Linux libre, you
should state it so, and not wait for reviewer to
find it out hyrself.

Maybe you want to demonstrate what you changed in
the Linux libre kernel.

My suggestion is to follow the guidelines, and
then to demonstrate exactly what is written in
guidelines, and not just ask for reviewer to do
the huge job of reviewing without giving proper
report on what you have done.

I have reviewed the website
https://connochaetos.org/wiki/imprint and I see it
shall be fully free Operating System, KISS
principle, very nice, that is how I like it.

Excellent project!

Sehr gut, viel Arbeit gemacht!

Apart from those already endorsed distributions,
in my opinion, the new distributions shall have
better list of packages, to quickly compare the
packages or software with already known libre
issues in other distributions.

I could not find a list of packages or software
that Conochaet OS is distributing. Maybe you can
send me the list? Or maybe you can quickly create
a page with such list?

On your website, I would also prefer to see more
explanation on 4 freedoms and meaning of free
software, so that website teaches people.

You and me, we know what is free software, new
people do not necessarily know it.

I also did not see much references to licenses.

When I read guidelines, I also do not see the
option, or clear and specific way to report
problems of nonfree software that is found
eventually. Something like a bug tracking.

So I just think, you should repeat your
communication so that you actually get an answer.

From
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

"If you know about a free distribution that isn't
listed there, please ask its developers write to
<address@hidden> with a description of their
system and a link to their web page."

Jean Louis