[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed
From: |
Leo Famulari |
Subject: |
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed |
Date: |
Tue, 25 Feb 2020 10:21:55 -0500 |
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 07:46:59AM -0500, Ruben Safir wrote:
> You mean aside from the fact that they posted in on their website?
I asked Alex if they had any more details about how the Guile and Guix
projects "have both excluded and/or vilified people who disagree with
people in power".
So far Alex has not replied. Your reply is not very informative but I
assume you are referring to the joint statement. That is not an example
of what Alex mentioned as far as I can tell, given that the signers of
the joint statement are by definition subordinate to RMS within GNU.
I asked Alex to back up their claim because, as someone who has worked
within Guix for years, I view the Guix project as notably friendly and
collegial — this behavior is modeled by Ludovic and is a primary factor
in Guix's growth and success.
I think Alex's claim is incorrect.
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed, Jean Louis, 2020/02/22
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed, Mike Gerwitz, 2020/02/22
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, 2020/02/22
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed, Leo Famulari, 2020/02/24
- Message not available
- Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed,
Leo Famulari <=
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed, Daniel Pocock, 2020/02/27