[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: A GNU “social contract”?
From: |
Dmitry Alexandrov |
Subject: |
Re: A GNU “social contract”? |
Date: |
Sat, 02 Nov 2019 23:13:57 +0300 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> wrote:
> Proposal of a “GNU Social Contract”
>
> This document states the core commitments of the GNU Project to the broader
> free software community. All current GNU Project members have agreed to
> uphold these values.
In other words, you suggest to tighten the screws even more than @ludo@gnu.org
(his ‘contract’ concerns only maintainers), do you?
Iʼm deeply afraid, you have to choose one of that and “GNU welcomes
contributors” below.
> The purpose of the GNU Project is to provide software and systems that
> respect users' freedoms.
>
> * GNU respects users' freedoms
> All software written by us is distributed under copyleft licenses, designed
> to ensure that developers cannot strip off users' freedom from GNU software.
Iʼd like to remind, that promoting a copyleft from a just a tool applied
strategically to a unyielding principle would be in contrary to the effective
recommendations published on gnu.org [1].
[1] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations.en.html#libraries
> Besides upholding the four essential freedoms, we pay attention and respond
> to new threats to users' freedom as they arise, such as services as a
> software substitute (SaaSS), use of non-free scripts on web pages, mass
> surveillance, digital restrictions management (DRM), etc.
Yet again, only the surveillance is _besides_ four computing freedoms. SaaSS
is bad exactly because it effectively provides none of them, while DRM and
nonfree webapps are just nonfree programs.
> * GNU welcomes contributions from all and everyone
>
> We want to give everyone the opportunity to contribute to our efforts on any
> of the many tasks that require work. We welcome all contributors…
Many GNU subprojects value ‘recordkeeping’ (per Prof. Moglen [2]) and
‘protection for FSF’ (per @ams@gnu.org [3]) more than giving anyone an
opportunity to contribute. Are you calling for change in priorities? If
yes, I would appreciate it, if you name few concrete steps.
[2] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html
[3] <E1iQGP2-0004y0-NH@fencepost.gnu.org>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Ludovic Courtès, 2019/11/01
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Andreas Enge, 2019/11/01
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?,
Dmitry Alexandrov <=
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Andreas Enge, 2019/11/05
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Dmitry Alexandrov, 2019/11/05
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Jean Louis, 2019/11/05
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Jean Louis, 2019/11/06
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Andreas Enge, 2019/11/06
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Jean Louis, 2019/11/06
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Alexandre François Garreau, 2019/11/06
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Andreas Enge, 2019/11/06
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Alexandre François Garreau, 2019/11/06
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Ruben Safir, 2019/11/06