[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of
Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project
Thu, 29 Apr 2021 23:09:34 +0300
* email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org> [2021-04-29 20:47]:
> This makes me doubt if Guix really respects FSF FSDG. If they cannot
> respect free software licenses, maybe they include non-free
I am sure that Guix would remove non-free software from system when
such is discovered. Guix will become major system to bootstrap other
distributions. There are many good points.
But licensing issues for software packages are not solved IMHO.
I think nobody reads those licenses.
Example is easy:
$ guix install hello
in /gnu/store the license is there "COPYING" and is fine.
"If the place to copy the object code is a network server, the
Corresponding Source may be on a different server (operated by you or
a third party) that supports equivalent copying facilities, provided
you maintain clear directions next to the object code saying where to
find the Corresponding Source. Regardless of what server hosts the
Corresponding Source, you remain obligated to ensure that it is
available for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements."
In this example, when I get hello package there is no clear direction
next to the object code saying where and how to find corresponding
On the Guix manual, I cannot find a reference:
There are 2 mentions of "source" but do not help in getting the source
code for particular package.
I know that sources' locations are embedded in package description,
but that cannot be said to be "clear direction" next to object
code. Package description is source code definitely not readable by
everyone. There is URL like mirror:// and there is scheme which one
need to understand to find the URL to the source.
In general, I don't find it easy to find source code for package
"hello". There may be a way, but it is not aligned with the license.
License is violated how I see it.
Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
Sign an open letter in support of Richard M. Stallman
Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project, shulie, 2021/04/28
- Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project, (continued)