Re: [GNU-linux-libre] Guix and FSDG

[Jean Louis]

* bill-auger <bill-auger@peers.community> [2019-11-26 22:42]:
> the only peculiar difference between the guix liberation
> procedures and others such as parabola and trisquel, would be
> that, the "swiss-army-knife" sort of tool used by guix, assists
> with both the installation of pre-made binary packages and also
> the downloading of liberation scripts and compilation from
> source, simply by passing different arguments to the same tool;
> and that tool is an essential system component - whereas, in
> order to make use of the parabola and trisquel liberation
> scripts, one needs to explicitly install separate, non-essential
> build tools, and to acquire the liberation scripts using some
> generic tool such as a web browser, git, or wget - im not
> certain, but i believe that the dragora package manager is more
> similar to guix in that way - we could discuss whether or not
> that subtlety is important; but i dont see it as fundamental to
> the underlying issue, which is whether or not the subject of
> liberation scripts should be made explicit in the FSDG
> 
> we can discuss that, one way or another; but i dont think that
> an amendment would be necessary to permit the publishing of
> liberation scripts, because i dont think that the FSDG currently
> prohibits it

Liberation scripts shall be free software, yet those should be
published as special package for distribution maintainers or
duplicators, within the distribution itself.

For users, users should not need to run liberation scripts when
getting distribution. They shall get the full free software without
the process of liberation.

In general, if distribution is called distribution, its method of
pulling software should not pull anything non-free to users
computers. Otherwise it is not distribution, per se. It is system of
preparing software on the computer, but is not distribution.

Distribution should have capacity to be duplicated, for example by
duplicating the DVD and giving the DVD to other person. It should have
capacity to be copied so that it can be shared. If any scripts are
involved there to prepare packages, it is not distribution, and it
impairs the capacity to share software, which is the point of
"distributing".

Look at the GNU Linux-libre kernel, it has been deblobbed, liberation
scripts exists, but it is distributed as free software. Users can get
only free software.

Distribution shall offer final product, free software, and not tools
to make the final product. That is unfinished work if users would ever
need to run liberation scripts to get to the free software. While
intention may not be to stear users to non-free software, that is
exactly where users are pointed to, to see that non-free software
exists, thus such scripts shall be run only by maintainers and not by
users.

Jean