[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: State of the GNUnion 2020

From: Samuel Thibault
Subject: Re: State of the GNUnion 2020
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 22:37:41 +0100
User-agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3)

Dmitry Gutov, le mar. 25 févr. 2020 12:24:25 +0200, a ecrit:
> On 25.02.2020 1:55, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > That is a problem. But one that wouldn't be solved simply by the
> > > leadership's say-so. GNU is usually all volunteers, and if existing
> > > developers don't accept the new project management platform, they won't 
> > > use
> > > it.
> > 
> > As I mentioned in another mail, I am not talking about the software
> > running the platform, but the community around the platform. It's the
> > contact they get from the community living on a given platform, which
> > makes the welcoming atmosphere. And there leadership does matter.
> Okay then. I'll rephrase what I said in another email as well.
> As a part of the community, I think you can work on that welcoming
> atmosphere without pushing RMS out, or asking for his blessing (which is
> surely already implicitly given, with Kind Communication Guidelines out
> there). And, to repeat myself, having the "crown" on your head is unlikely
> to make this process particularly easier.

I never asked for a "crown".

I just support that text which, among other things, summarizes the Kind
Communicatin Guidelines.

> > > If we declare that all of GNU should share a certain set of values, and
> > > especially that maintainers must share the free software values, whatever 
> > > it
> > > really means in practice, *that* sounds exclusionary already.
> > 
> > Did you really read what was actually written on
> > ?
> > It does not talk about the values that contributors hold for themselves,
> > it talks about the values put in the software of the GNU project:
> > 
> > “
> > The GNU Project provides software that guarantees to all users the Four
> > Essential Freedoms, without compromise:
> > ”
> > 
> > etc. It does not talk about exclusively using free software etc.
> *shrug* Again, you have put out a document that reiterates things that
> should already be so. So that leaves (apparently not only myself) guessing
> what is it for.
> Could you clarify, then, what that message might have been about:
> ?
> Specifically, the first paragraph. What free software values the maintainers
> do not currently agree to uphold, but will if they adhere to the Social
> Contract?
> Maybe you guys should have a talk between yourselves and figure out whether
> everyone shares the same understanding and vision for it.

? Why would we talk between ourselves? There is not secret plan or such

Apparently Ludo meant it to go further than what I'm talking about. But
the text does not say that much (and it doesn't match the current state
of GNU maintainers, so it should not IMHO).


reply via email to

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