Re: State of the GNUnion 2020

[Jean Louis]

* DJ Delorie <dj@delorie.com> [2020-02-11 23:26]:
> 
> ams@gnu.org (Alfred M. Szmidt) writes:
> > You make the incorrect assumption that the health of the GNU project
> > should be measured in how many new projects are adopted or released --
> > instead of what our goal is to provide a free operating system.
> 
> Are we DONE producing that operating system?  No?  If not, why not?

I am running here Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre system, so it exists.

And I was using GNU/Linux operating system since 1999 with success Now
it is 21 years. You may find various installable GNU versions:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html

> Aren't all those developers who finished their packages working on
> other, new packages?

Isn't that up to them to decide? There is and should not be any
coercion.

> Why aren't the package counts continuing to increase, if the
> developers are otherwise unoccupied?

You are probably referring to GNU packages. You may invite those new
packages or new software to GNU, or contribute, and everybody is free
to help the GNU project, see: https://www.gnu.org/help/help.html

And if you see the FSF endorsed free operating system distributions,
as long as the free software is being distributed, the purpose is also
being fulfilled, both for FSF, as purpose for FSF is among others to
distribute free software, and for GNU project, as purpose was always
to create a fully free operating system.

> I think, package activity *is* a valid metric if the goal is "all
> packages in the OS are free."

As GNU operating system already exists, in my opinion, what should be
measured as main statistic is number of free GNU operating systems
actually installed on a computer.

That is the purpose.

However, that statistics is harder to measure. Thus what is measurable
is download statistics.

You could inquire with various free distributions about the download
statistics.

> If a set of developers finish a package, and don't start on a new
> one, I think that says something interesting about the health of GNU
> and its community.

Maybe "health" is not a proper adjective, as GNU is not a human body,
it is operating system.

In that sense, if I look only into those GNU operating systems which
are endorsed by the FSF, they are releasing and distributing free
software. Trisquel, Hyperbola, Guix, etc. they are releasing,
distributing, maintaining free software.

Then if we wish to speak by using the adjective "healthy", I see the
GNU project very healthy, there are ways to submit bugs, improvements,
close security holes... and

YOU are free to contribute to make it healthier.

Jean