Re: LibreJS (was Re: CodeBerg addition)

[Aaron Wolf]

Note that there's also this issue at Gitea:
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/13393

Anyway, I think it is not okay to downgrade Codeberg for not functioning with LibreJS when it is 100% free software anyway. Insisting on this particular tooling needs to not be such a strong requirement.

I think LibreJS needs some improved options for operating and should not be a blocker to Codeberg getting a higher grade.

In practice, if sites that are 100% free software are not being recognized by LibreJS, and the way modern sites are put together makes doing this non-trivial, then the problem is LibreJS's approach, not the site.

I think the criteria should be updated. Imagine if the criteria for GNU distros included something like zero flags with the vrms program *and* maintaining that was challenging. We shouldn't penalize services so much when this is not an issue for software freedom but an incidental tooling issue that has no ramifications for software freedom in practice.

Aaron

On 2024-01-04 12:43, Jing Luo wrote:

> Hello,
>       
>       
>       I'm glad to see CodeBerg passes so many criteria, but on the other
>       hand, the libreJS issue [1] may not be resolved for the
>       foreseeable future because of the technical difficulty originated
>       from upstream ("Gitea"): the lead maintainer says it's not
>       possible for Forgejo to generate the tags for librejs to recognize
>       them, which means Codeberg would not satisfy criteria C0.0 and B0
>       for a long time. Is there anyone on this list who can help with
>       this issue? I see on software/repo-criteria.html it says "contact
>       Mike Gerwitz at <mtg@gnu.o> for help", is this info up to
>       date?
>       
>       
>       I myself plan to use Forgejo to host a website for free software,
>       that's why I'm eager to see this resolved (although I'm not a good
>       programmer...)
>       
>       
>       Or, do you (the people on this list) consider changing the
>       criteria C0.0 to something like "the _javascript_ should be free but
>       it doesn't have to be librejs compliant"? As you can see it's a
>       challenge for some senario...
>       
>       
>       [1] https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/1654
>       
>       
>