Re: Forge Software Evaluation by FSF

[David Kastrup]

Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> writes:

> On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 11:23 PM Jonas Hahnfeld <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I was meaning to write on the next steps of switching to new tooling
>> when I came across this:
>> https://lwn.net/Articles/813254/rss
>> https://www.fsf.org/blogs/sysadmin/coming-soon-a-new-site-for-fully-free-collaboration
>> https://libreplanet.org/wiki/Fsf_2019_forge_evaluation
>>
>> In particular the last page claims with respect to GitLab:
>> "GNU ethical repo criteria: gitlab.com listed as C, but has been
>> operating at an F and will be reclassified soon because it sometimes
>> requires users to run nonfree Google ReCAPTCHA code they have been very
>> slowly working on moving away from for almost 2 years now [...]"
>>
>> What do people think about this? Is that serious enough to stop
>> considering GitLab?
>>
>> Note that Gerrit is not on the list (probably because it's not a
>> complete forge software, ie no issues?), so I can't comment on how it
>> compares with respect to freedom.
>
> Gerrit is open source under the Apache 2 license.  However, this is
> comparing apples and pears. Because gitlab.com is a service provider,
> that runs Gitlab for you.
>
> If we want someone to host our forge (eg. gitlab.com) for free or a
> small fee, that will have to be an entity that needs to scale its user
> support model (or it wouldn't be gratis). This typically means it
> needs something like reCaptcha to heed off spam/abuse, and Tor access
> is probably problematic for the same reason.
>
> This is also why I have a hard time taking the FSF's stance here
> seriously.  Their conditions make it almost impossible to use a
> commercial provider. For example C2 "Does not discriminate against
> classes of users, or against any country" is impossible to satisfy for
> any US company due to export restrictions for countries like North
> Korea and Iran.
>
> There is also a bunch of verbiage about how tracking tags are evil.
> (lilypond.org has been running Google Analytics for 15 years or so).

Because?

> I suggest to focus on the needs of our project, rather than the edicts
> of RMS.

The FSF is not the "edicts of RMS" and it wasn't reduced to that while
he was president, either.  They are to a good degree in the business of
caring about details that are easily lost in complacency.  There is a
value in that.  After all, our whole planet is slated for extinction
through complacency by now.

So I see no point in not trying to evaluate the feedback they bother to
provide.  Whether we are realistically in a position to make our project
adopt it is a different question, but I see no point in ignoring it.

>> Let me see if I can get more information on when they plan to bring
>> the hosting platform online.

It may well be that the recent upheavals have moved that somewhat to the
backburner.  Still good to check, though.

-- 
David Kastrup
My replies have a tendency to cause friction.  To help mitigating
damage, feel free to forward problematic posts to me adding a subject
like "timeout 1d" (for a suggested timeout of 1 day) or "offensive".