[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org |
Date: |
Wed, 31 Mar 2021 00:47:52 -0400 |
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> PASS - A4 - Does not permit non-free licenses
> the notabug (gogs) software does not have a mechanism to
> enforce this (no forge that i am aware of does, not even
> savannah); but the ToS makes it clear that it is provided "for
> Free/Libre software projects as defined by the Free Software
> Foundation" - the admin will revoke public access to (or delete)
> any repo found to be non-free
That is very clearly "not permitting".
- it is not feasible to police
> private repos in that way; so i would hold this criteria as
> applicable only to publicly accessible repos
I agree that this is true. Perhaps we should clarify A4 in this way.
WDPT?
--
Dr Richard Stallman
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)
- (re-)evaluation of notabug.org, bill-auger, 2021/03/23
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org, Richard Stallman, 2021/03/31
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org, Richard Stallman, 2021/03/31
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org, Richard Stallman, 2021/03/31
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org, Hein-Pieter van Braam-Stewart, 2021/03/31
- Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org (re-send from the correct email address), Hein-Pieter van Braam-Stewart, 2021/03/31