Re: [GNU-linux-libre] DSFG in perpetuity

[Robert Call]

On Sun, 2018-03-25 at 19:26 +0200, Zlatan Todoric wrote:
> On 3/25/18 5:28 PM, Robert Call wrote:
> > On Sun, 2018-03-25 at 11:58 +0200, Zlatan Todoric wrote:
> > > On 3/24/18 6:51 PM, bill-auger wrote:
> > > > * pureos has a long-standing open request to remove chromium in
> > > > solidarity with the other FSDG distros - that issue is o/c a
> > > > separate
> > > > can of worms; but i think all distros should be projecting a
> > > > uniform
> > > > message, however vague the circumstance, until such
> > > > controversies
> > > > are
> > > > resolved - or *at the very least*, all distros affected by the
> > > > controversy should be participating in the discussions on this
> > > > list
> > > 
> > > You have our tracker to comment on that and can't expect us to be
> > > all
> > > the time everywhere, especially not on list that proved itself as
> > > a
> > > bashing field. We do read it, we just don't jump anymore in
> > > discussions
> > > here as they tend to go south for various reasons that I don't
> > > want
> > > to
> > > spend time nor energy on it. Simply removing chromium is a
> > > disservice
> > > for average user and it shouldn't be a task taken easily. Also,
> > > while
> > > it
> > > would nice for distros to have solidarity with each other, that
> > > is
> > > not
> > > happening and PureOS is often taken into hostage situation most
> > > likely
> > > because it is funded by Purism which in my opinion should be
> > > celebrated
> > > that one commercial company is willing to put funds into such
> > > project
> > > and not the other way around. I have now fully requested removal
> > > and
> > > blockade of chromium package but next time please go to our
> > > bugtracker
> > > and report a bug there and start discussion (we are actively
> > > working
> > > on
> > > PureOS. Also all current PureOS staff are Debian Developers as
> > > well,
> > > we
> > > also have other duties so you can't take against us that we have
> > > lack
> > > of
> > > time and energy to be everywhere).
> > > 
> > > https://tracker.pureos.net/T57
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > * then, the other can of worms regarding the debian kernel - if
> > > > this is
> > > > what has been preventing connochaetos from being endorsed, then
> > > > pureos
> > > > and any future candidates should be held to that same standard
> > > > without
> > > > exception - again, at the very least, all distros affected by
> > > > the
> > > > controversy should be expected to participate in the discussion
> > > > on
> > > > this list
> > > 
> > > Debian kernel itself is entirely free but there was issues with
> > > messages
> > > that was brought to us and we worked on it both in PureOS and
> > > Debian
> > > at
> > > same time.
> > > 
> > > https://tracker.pureos.net/T362
> > > 
> > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=888405
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > admittedly, i have been kicking pureos a lot lately - mainly
> > > > because i
> > > > have been hoping to see someone from pureos defend it - it
> > > > seems
> > > > quite
> > > > clear to me that no one from pureos is reading this list - i
> > > > would
> > > > propose that one of the FSDG requirements should be for each
> > > > distro
> > > > to
> > > > elect a delegate to follow, if not actively participate in the
> > > > discussions on this list on behalf of the distro - and ideally,
> > > > to
> > > > stand
> > > > uniformly with the greater community in the grey areas of the
> > > > FSDG
> > > > such
> > > > as the current chromium issue and the debian kernel
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Kicking PureOS is just doing disfavor to what are you trying - if
> > > you
> > > kick me don't expect me to be nice, that is not how things work
> > > especially in volunteer based projects. You are also doing false
> > > assumptions and that is again bringing me to first point - this
> > > list
> > > is
> > > toxic for no reason, if you can't work nicely you shouldn't work
> > > at
> > > all.
> > > You have bug tracker for PureOS if you want to work with PureOS
> > > community and not stretch us on dozen of sides.
> > > 
> > 
> > Yelling "this list is toxic" does not help you or anyone else. Both
> > Purism and PureOS did this to themselves with the long list of
> > problems
> > from the start. While I don't agree with Bill's stance, I would say
> > that more time is needed to get over these issues. Being entailed
> > and
> > asserting that everyone must forgive you for past issues right now
> > is
> > not going to get you very far and you must have the patience.
> 
> Your behavior is again not acceptable - you're assuming I am yelling
> and yet proving the toxicity. 

What behavior are you talking about? This is the first time I have
really made any statements in regards to Purism or PureOS. I kept quiet
on most issues even when I wanted to speak up. Is it toxic to work
towards a certain goal and not make compromises on that goal? Taring
and feathering me is not helping. I would go further and ask what other
buzz words are you going to throw at or call me?

> While Purism did make claims it could not 
> stand to it in timeframe it wanted, Purism is still moving thing
> slowly 
> forward and even has constitution to defend such stand. Issues you
> have 
> with Purism are not part of PureOS and I mentioned Purism only in 
> context that PureOS gets bashed basically because Purism is behind
> it. 

What more did you expect when a project is started by a parent company
and pushed for a discrete nvidia GPU for their crowdfunding campaign?
Had it been a truly independent project, that would not have happened.
Projects associated with a parent company always carry the baggage of
the parent company.

> There is no far or patience part - we went through process, been
> there 
> for 2 years, got accepted as endorsed and are committed to it - that
> has 
> nothing to do with your or other feelings.
> 

"Feelings" are not a part of this. It is about building trust. Trust is
easier to break than it is to build and it takes time. You are not
going to convince many people that you are committed if you smear them
or can't understand that it takes time to build trust. No matter what
one does, it can't be rush or forced.

> To speak more to topic part - we were pointed to parts for being an 
> endorsed distro and one is being actively maintained to be accepted,
> and 
> that is a good requirement. Being un-maintained is disservice to
> users 
> and a security risk as well and such distro should be promoted as
> new 
> user will get into trouble and maybe end up blaming FSF and other 
> distros. PureOS is actively maintained with public bugtracker so
> bring 
> your technical issues there.
> 
> > 
> > Many of us are willing to forgive PureOS and Purism for past
> > issues,
> > but it is going to take more time for Purism and PureOS to show
> > they
> > are dedicated to the Free Software movement. Many of us in the Free
> > Software community are still concerned about some of the current
> > actions and behavior of Purism and the lack of community around
> > PureOS.
> 
> We are not here to beg or get your forgiveness, that has nothing to
> do 
> with PureOS and we already showed our dedication to the movement in
> many 
> ways, but you can ignore it and continue bashing. 

I'm not going to bash it just because. I work on a basis of proof and
if I see an issue, I'm going to talk about it. I also don't want to
compromise on freedom.

> The issues you see, 
> please raise but I am aware of lack of community which is also issue
> for 
> us - we want to have active community around it and we are already 
> internally in final process of having community mails with fine-
> grained 
> access and permissions to PureOS (and wider Purism) infrastructure.
> This 
> should be publicly announced in April most likely (I wanted this
> couple 
> of months ago but there are other pressing issues all the time).
> 
> 
> > 
> > If you are wanting to fix these issues, it is going to take time
> > and I
> > encourage Purism and the PureOS team to reach out to those who have
> > been a part of the Free Software community for a while instead of
> > making guesses and taking a few stabs in the dark. Many of us have
> > been
> > doing this for a long time and we have the wounds to show for it.
> > If in
> > doubt, reach out.
> 
> Reach out what exactly? We will reach out for community activity for 
> sure but I don't understand your tone - we already passed the distro 
> review, you can either help us get better (as being an active Free 
> distro is going to be always WIP) or try to fix review process if
> you 
> feel unhappy about it. Many of us in Purism are also long time
> community 
> members (decades and decades of experience) and we have also wounds
> but 
> don't go around and dictate others how and what should they do. If
> in 
> doubt - use the public bugtracker.
> 

Purism did not reach out about freedom issues with certain hardware and
as a result, some hardware sold (and promised) stopped working a result
of removing firmware. This would not have happened had Purism and
PureOS consulted people who have been working in these areas and care
about non-free software and blobs. The same goes with the reason that
chromium is not a freedom respecting browser.

I want to give Purism and PureOS a chance to redeem themselves, but
personal attacks and smearing won't help bring people to your side or
PureOS as a community project. Getting upset when people point out a
fault won't help build a community. If you don't like my tone, I'm
sorry if text is not the best medium to talk about these issues in a
constructive way.


--
Robert Call (Bob)
address@hidden
https://librecmc.org