[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: A summary of some open discussions

From: Brandon Invergo
Subject: Re: A summary of some open discussions
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2020 10:16:13 +0000
User-agent: mu4e 1.2.0; emacs 26.3

Mark Wielaard writes:

>> There is no such thing as a FSF steward, GNU maintainers are appointed
>> by RMS/GAC.  The FSF has no say in the topic.  You've keept
>> misrepresenting this over and over again.
> This is just a legal technicallity. The FSF has oversight
> responsibility over the GNU project. That means that the FSF needs to
> determine that GNU maintainers operate in a manner consistent with
> FSF's exempt purposes, have the needed expertise and that their
> activities can be monitored by the FSF board. So GNU Maintainers and
> Steering committees are technically appointed by the FSF (previously
> RMS when he was FSF president and board member) as stewards of GNU
> packages. Basically GNU maintainers serve at the pleasure of the FSF.

This is absolutely false.

As a member of the package evaluation team and as an Assistant
GNUissance (, I have personally been involved in
many appointments of new maintainers at every step of the process, from
first contact with GNU through to post-appointment bureaucracy and
occasional check-ins.  I also have the authority to appoint new
maintainers of existing packages myself (only Richard can appoint
maintainers of new packages).  In fact, I personally appointed some new
co-maintainers of Guix back in September, two weeks *after* Richard
resigned as president of the FSF, which Ludovic can confirm.

I can categorically say that the FSF is not involved whatsoever in the
appointment of new maintainers.

Please do not spread misinformation about the GNU project.


ps - To correct Alfred: the GAC is also not involved in the appointment
of maintainers (unless Richard were to ask them for advice in specific

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]