Re: [GNU-linux-libre] FSDG interpretations

[Ineiev]

On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 01:12:39AM +0200, Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli wrote:
> 
> And from my experience of contributing to various FSDG distributions,
> if a distribution ships big number of packages or software components,
> asking the current maintainers to fix all the FSDG compliance bugs at
> once is probably not going to work because doing that would probably
> require multiple people working full time on most FSDG compliant
> distributions. 
> 
> For instance there is a lot of third party package managers, and fixing
> all the issues can take a very long time. And many distributions have
> FSDG compliance bugs that are open for years.
> 
> But maintainers usually welcome help, so if we provide them with fixes
> that are really good and work out of the box, they usually accept them.
> 
> If they don't accept fixes because they don't want the FSDG compliance
> issue to be fixed, then that is probably sufficient to get the
> distribution removed.

Then working on fixes may be even more important than reporting them.
Currently, the page listing free distros [0] encourages people
to report bugs; perhaps it should call for making fixes as well
(and/or/but/yet better).  The distro, on the other hand, might
publish a short specific prominent HowTo for those who would like
to submit a fix.

Also, this passage from the FSDG [1] may surprise the visitors,
especially the "promptly":

        Our requirement is for the distribution developers to have
        a firm commitment to promptly correct any mistakes
        that are reported to them.

An exaggerated image of resources behind the distros not only
leaves people disappointed---they often just don't realize they may,
are welcome, are expected to contribute.

[0] https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html#intro
[1] 
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html#mistakes

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature