Re: Git mirrors

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Óscar Fuentes <address@hidden>
> Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:31:03 +0200
> Cc: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden>, address@hidden
> 
> The past is "choosing bzr over other Free alternatives was politicaly
> motivated regardless of technical merit; the interests of GNU prevailed,
> users were dismissed."
> 
> The present is "providing a convenient git mirror is considered not good
> for GNU; once again, GNU is considered more important than users."
> 
> I always thought that Free Software is about the user, always the
> user. But once you begin privileging some packages simply because they
> abide to GNU, and viewing others as "not beneficial" because they don't,
> irrespectively of its merit, then GNU starts looking as a menacing
> entity, something dangerous that pretends to roll over your beloved
> creations just because that's good for GNU's self-interest.

I disagree with this interpretation, but I'm sure Richard will explain
things better than I ever could.

> If some Emacs hackers feel more at home with
> git/mercurial/whatever-other-Free-tool, why not simply provide it?

Because it takes the effort from other useful development tasks.  And
because providing every possible tool, just because someone feels more
at home with it, when reasonable alternatives exist, is not the norm
in Free Software projects.  What is not required from projects that
use git should not be required from projects that use bzr.