[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Talking about software distributions on the list
From: |
Bob Ham |
Subject: |
Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Talking about software distributions on the list |
Date: |
Sat, 16 Mar 2013 21:27:59 +0000 |
On Sat, 2013-03-02 at 16:42 +0000, Simon Ward wrote:
> 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
I agree with the distinctions between different categories but I have a
very strong feeling that we should not be banning people from *talking*
about any particular subjects. I would prefer it if the guidelines
addressed only *promotion* and did not go as far as addressing all
talking.
There may be instances of a subjective determination of whether some
particular speech constitutes promotion but I think it's reasonable to
leave this open and allow a consensus to form over such cases.
> 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.
Should this read that there "isn't an explicit definition"? :-) And I
see you're agreeing with me on the talking :-) Perhaps the wording
above just needs to be clarified?
> “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.
Ack.
> 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.]
Ack.
--
Bob Ham <address@hidden>
for (;;) { ++pancakes; }
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Talking about software distributions on the list, Steffi Tinder, 2013/03/08
Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Talking about software distributions on the list,
Bob Ham <=
Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Talking about software distributions on the list, Simon Ward, 2013/03/17