[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization
From: |
Mark Wielaard |
Subject: |
Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization |
Date: |
Fri, 25 Oct 2019 12:20:11 +0200 |
On Thu, 2019-10-24 at 22:50 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Alfred M. Szmidt, le jeu. 24 oct. 2019 16:31:41 -0400, a ecrit:
> > We don't promote non-free software, we don't host non-free software,
> > so clearly things have worked for 30 years where they have not for
> > Debian.
>
> The goals were different. In the Debian case it was written in the
> social contract right from its writing in 1997 that it provides
> infrastructure for non-free packages. So you can't say "things didn't
> work" for Debian: it worked the way it was written in the social
> contract. The main archive of Debian does not contain non-free software,
> only mentions to it (which is what the social contract allows).
>
> > And the reason for that is the strong stance against non-free
> > software, and dedication from RMS on the subject.
>
> And a social contract can provide this as well.
>
> Stubbornness can also, but it is also detrimental for other parts of the
> GNU project.
Right. I think what is being objected to is a GNU Social Contract that
would contain something like this part of the Debian Social Contract
https://www.debian.org/social_contract
We acknowledge that some of our users require the use of works
that do not conform to the Debian Free Software Guidelines. We
have created "contrib" and "non-free" areas in our archive for
these works. The packages in these areas are not part of the
Debian system, although they have been configured for use with
Debian. We encourage CD manufacturers to read the licenses of the
packages in these areas and determine if they can distribute the
packages on their CDs. Thus, although non-free works are not a
part of Debian, we support their use and provide infrastructure
for non-free packages (such as our bug tracking system and
mailing lists).
And I would absolutely agree. That is definitely not something that
would be acceptable for the GNU Social Contract.
Cheers,
Mark
- Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization, (continued)
- Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization, Mark Wielaard, 2019/10/24
- Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2019/10/24
- Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization, Samuel Thibault, 2019/10/24
- Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2019/10/24
- Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization, Samuel Thibault, 2019/10/24
- Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization, Ruben Safir, 2019/10/24
- Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization, Samuel Thibault, 2019/10/24
- Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2019/10/27
- Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2019/10/24
- Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization, Samuel Thibault, 2019/10/24
- Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization,
Mark Wielaard <=
- Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization, Samuel Thibault, 2019/10/25
- Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2019/10/27
- Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization, Samuel Thibault, 2019/10/27
- Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2019/10/27
- A GNU “social contract”?, Ludovic Courtès, 2019/10/25
- “GNU software is distributed under the terms of [copyleft] licenses” (was: A GNU “social contract”?), Dmitry Alexandrov, 2019/10/25
- Re: “GNU software is distributed under the terms of [copyleft] licenses” (was: A GNU “social contract”?), Mark Wielaard, 2019/10/26
- Re: “GNU software is distributed under the terms of [copyleft] licenses” (was: A GNU “social contract”?), Carlos O'Donell, 2019/10/27
- Re: “GNU software is distributed under the terms of [copyleft] licenses”, Ludovic Courtès, 2019/10/27
- Re: “GNU cares for computer user freedom beyond software” (was: A GNU “social contract”?), Dmitry Alexandrov, 2019/10/25