fsuk-manchester
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Fsuk-manchester] Talking about software distributions on the list


From: Simon Ward
Subject: [Fsuk-manchester] Talking about software distributions on the list
Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2013 16:42:15 +0000
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

Just restarting this thread, I’m going to take a step back and summarise
again, with some slight changes based on some of the comments (some
off‐list).


Definitions
-----------
“promote”:
    actively encourage the use of

“free system distribution” or “free software distribution”:
    (interchangeable) any system that meets the criteria in the
    Guidelines for Free System Distributions[1].


Guidelines for talking about Software Distributions
---------------------------------------------------
Any distribution that meets all of the criteria in the Guidelines for
Free System Distributions[1]:

    talk about or promote as a “free system distribution” or “free
    software distribution”

A distribution that does not quite meet the criteria due to one or two
minor problems, but aims to be a free software distribution:

    talk about as a free software distribution with with caveats (these
    must be mentioned); or as a distribution that isn’t a free software
    distribution but aims to be a free software distribution.

A distribution that does not meet the criteria, and does not have a policy
towards being a free software distribution, or recommends non‐free
software:

    do not promote as a free software distribution; talk about as a
    distribution that contains free software, but also highlight the
    lack of policy towards being a free software distribution.

Any non‐free software distribution:

    do not promote; do not talk about except with respect to free
    software, e.g: free software alternatives, running free software on
    the distribution.


Why am I doing this?
--------------------
The question came up asking for confirmation whether it was okay to talk
about or promote Debian on the list, and not Ubuntu.

There are differing opinions on this: we have people supporting strictly
free software unwilling to accept anything else, some inbetweens,
through, given the original post (and response) that sparked this off,
to people people who thought promoting a distribution that decidedly
promotes non‐free software, Ubuntu, on the list would be ok.

If we are going to start saying what distributions we can talk about or
promote on the list we need to define something objective that can, as
much as possible, be interpreted similarly by all, rather than our many
differing opinions. Then, should the topic come up again, we simply
point to the guidelines rather than re‐hashing all of the old arguments,
and concentrate on free software advocacy.


Aims
----
To come up with some guidelines for talking about and promoting software
and software distributions, that:

 1. Meet the purpose of Manchester Free Software, to advocate free
    software and the free software philosophy.

 2. Are in line with the topic for the mailing list, which is
    “Discussion about Manchester Free Software, free software,
    GNU/Linux, Digital Restrictions Management and other issues which
    infringe on the freedoms of computer users.”

 3. Do not unnecessarily hinder discussion about free software.

 4. Discourage the promotion of non‐free software.

 5. Are concerned only with free software criteria.

 6. Put distributions on a level playing field, that is, assess each
    distribution against the same criteria without exception.


Rationale for Aims
------------------

 1. This is a Manchester Free Software mailing list (the list name is
    historic).

 2. The guidelines are clarifying part of what is considered on‐topic;
    it makes no sense for the guidelines to suggest anything off‐topic.

 3. Free software is explicitly defined as on‐topic for the list. List
    members should be able to freely talk about on‐topic subjects.

 4. Promotion of non‐free software is opposite to the aims of Manchester
    Free Software, and is off‐topic for the list.

 5. Other criteria are implicitly off‐topic, and as such are out of
    scope for these guidelines.

 6. Anything else would be unfair.


Rationale for Definitions
-------------------------
There is an explicit definition for promotion because it can be unclear
whether merely talking about something is promoting it. Talking about
distributions containing free software should be possible.

“Free system distribution” and “free software distribution” are
considered interchangeable because it is unclear how they might be
distinguished and attempting to distinguish them may lead to confusion.

Free system distribution and free software distribution are defined
based on the Guidelines for Free System Distributions[1] because they
exist and are already being used by some parts of the free software
community to determine whether to use or endorse systems.
[There are no “better” rationale, the decision to use them was largely
arbitrary, and there will always be someone that takes issue with any
choice that does not sit with their own subjective opinions.]


Changes
-------
  * Removed most of the diatribe.
  * Added explicit definitions.
  * Added rationale.
  * Relaxed guideline for talking about nearly free software
    distributions as free software distributions.
  * Removed references to specific distributions (though these could be
    re‐introduced as examples).

[1]: http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

Simon
-- 
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that works.—John Gall
-- 
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that works.—John Gall

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]