Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Talking about non-free software on the list (was: Any folks in Manchester interested in participating in an Ubuntu Global Jam event if I were to organise one?)

[Bob Ham]

On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 15:18 +0000, Simon Ward wrote:

> Guidelines:
> 
> Neither Debian nor Ubuntu should be promoted as *free software
> distributions* on this mailing list. Note my highlighting, this is quite
> specific. This goes for any system not in the List of Free GNU/Linux
> Distributions[1], or rather that fails to follow all of the Guidelines
> for Free System Distributions[4].

I would suggest that we do not qualify the promotion and just state that
neither "should be promoted on this mailing list"..

> Debian may be promoted as a distribution that aims to be free software,
> so long as it is also made clear that Debian fails to follow all of the
> Guidelines for Free System Distributions[4].

..with this caveat, which is fine.


> Please avoid promoting Ubuntu, or any other system that does not strive
> to be completely free.

Ack.

> Feel free to talk about free software on Ubuntu and other non‐free
> systems, or how to cajoule the systems into being entirely free. Take
> care to avoid promoting this situation, it’s possible and better just to
> install a free software system.

Ack.

> Do bear in mind that this mailing list is not intended to be a support
> list, more a discussion about Manchester Free Software itself and the
> political and social issues surrounding free software. While many of us
> are happy to help with users having issues with free software, some will
> be reluctant to assist those trying to run free software on a non‐free
> system and vice versa.

Ack.

> When discussing any non‐free software, please make it clear that it is
> non‐free, and be sure to mention free software alternatives where they
> exist.

Ack.


> Does this sound reasonable? Is it too strict, or too open to
> interpretation? Are the requirements to mention failure to be completely
> free, or free software alternatives too onerous?

Seems fine.

-- 
Bob Ham <address@hidden>

for (;;) { ++pancakes; }

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part