Re: general policies

[Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli]

On Fri, 22 Sep 2023 00:51:28 -0400
bill-auger <bill-auger@peers.community> wrote:
> gnuzilla is such a lucid example because it is a web browser; and
> people expect web browsers to be constantly revised - most of the
> other examples at which people may point are not that sort of
> software - things like gnu-smalltalk and gnustep are awesome just as
> they are - "yes" they are very old, and "no" they do not need to
> change very much or often - most people criticizing GNU for
> publishing stale software probably do not appreciate that good
> software does not need to change constantly and is best when it
> stabilizes
Indeed some other browsers have similar issues. Some time ago (maybe 1
year ago) there was a thread in Guix about issues with Webkit based
browsers.

But people don't tell "It's old don't use" but people wanting to inform
users rather mention the real issue which is that they depend on a not
well maintained enough code base (Webkit) and because of that it's
insecure, so don't use (on the public internet or with untrusted
pages).

The "we are new use (our software)", "they are old don't use (their
software)" are often just propaganda techniques that don't bring
anything to the table. You could also replace software with any
political ideas, regimes, etc.

Real issues, use cases, freedom, etc are more relevant to debates about
what software to use than old or new, unless we suppose that there are
issues that always affect old software, but in that case it's better to
name the issue specifically rather than "old" or "new".

For instance if all old software have code that nobody looks at (I've
no idea if it's true or not), then it's easier to name that issue
directly (and invent a name for it if needed).

Denis.

pgp9GdBzP2l48.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature