[bug#28004] [GNU-linux-libre] [PATCH] gnu: Add ungoogled-chromium.

[Julie Marchant]

On 02/03/2019 11:52 PM, bill-auger wrote:
> re: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2019-02/msg00009.html
> 
> i would like to remind readers of the guix-devel list that it was
> discussed some months ago, why no FSDG distros currently distribute
> chromium[1] - it appeared at that time, that most people in that
> discussion were in agreement that chromium should not be included in
> guix; and marius was instead hosting it in a private repo, as not to
> taint the main guix repos with dubious software - has there been a
> notable break-through since then?
> 
> what is the evidence for this claim that this guix package is "free
> software only"? - what does "Marks beautiful computed-origin-method" do
> toward that end? - if a procedure for liberating any chromium-derived
> software has been discovered, this would be a marvelous accomplishment
> and very good news indeed, of which people outside of the guix dev team
> would also be interested to learn
> 
> if the guix team has discovered some new information or has concocted a
> viable liberation recipe for chromium or any of it's offspring, then i
> hope that, for the benefit of all fellow Fosstopians, someone would
> present that information to the FSDG mailing list for review and
> discussion - it would be extra neighborly if that happened *before*
> offering this program to guix users, while fully knowing that the other
> FSDG distros are still intentionally suppressing it in solidarity
> 
> again, i am totally indifferent as to whether anyone uses chromium or
> not - my only interest in this is that i would like to strengthen the
> FSDG by convincing FSDG distros to communicate and collaborate with each
> other, and to achieve consensus about common issues such as this, that
> clearly affect all distros equally; so that no one is compelled to ask
> "why does guixsd endorse that popular program if other FSDG distros
> reject it on principal?" - it is difficult enough to explain to users
> why these programs are rejected in the first place; but at least the
> way things are now, we can say that all FSDG distros are in agreement to
> err on the conservative side until a satisfactory liberation procedure
> is found and documented - currently, the documented liberation
> procedure is: "Remove program/package. Use GNU IceCat, or
> equivalent"[2] - if there is a better candidate procedure now, let us
> get it onto the table for discussion
> 
> i would like to consider all FSDG distros as being part of a larger
> federation, sharing the same primary goals; but we cant all be reading
> all of the dev lists - let us communicate whenever applicable, in the
> common venue that exists for that purpose[3] - i tried enticing the
> folks on the guix team to do that previously - if there is indeed
> something new to announce regarding chromium's dubious FSDG status,
> please elect someone from guix to do so now - this would be very
> interesting news to the readers of that list, and your effort and/or
> accomplishment would be sincerely applauded - other FSDG distros would
> be happy (and some quite eager) to re-instate any of these
> chromium-derived packages if a consensus could be reached that any of
> them could be distributed 100% freely; but if all distros are to decide
> for themselves what is freely distributable and what is not, without
> evidence and without discussing it with the other FSDG distros nor the
> FSF, then the FSDG loses its teeth, and we all look wishy-washy and
> flakey on that, the main, central FSDG concern: which programs are
> freely distributable and which are not
> 
> 
> [1]: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2018-09/msg00264.html
> [2]:
> https://libreplanet.org/wiki/List_of_software_that_does_not_respect_the_Free_System_Distribution_Guidelines#chromium-browser
> [3]: https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-linux-libre

Sorry, I didn't notice that this thread was on multiple lists, so when I
hit "Reply List" it only went to the GNU-linux-libre list. Sending a
copy to the other lists; sorry for the messiness.

I'm not sure if I've mentioned it on the GNU-linux-libre list before,
but I have never seen any actual evidence of the current version of
Chromium containing proprietary components.

It's an unreasonable standard to demand proof that programs are libre.
That's an impossible thing to prove. If someone points out, as I have
many times, "I have looked through Chromium's code and not found a
single proprietary program," someone can simply say that they didn't
look hard enough.

That LibrePlanet page, by the way, is not evidence of Chromium
containing proprietary components. It claims such, but the only evidence
provided is a copyright file that clearly indicates a libre license, and
a bug report about not passing a license checking script, which I might
add is also not proof of any program being proprietary. Not to mention,
this is from over eight years ago. Should distro maintainers also take
the outdated recommendation to remove Project: Starfighter from that
page at face value, despite the fact that I released a completely libre
version almost four years ago? The point is, that's a wiki page
sporadically maintained by volunteers. It's a possible starting point
(though to be honest I'm not so sure it's even useful for that), but not
an indication of the GNU FSDG gold standard, so to speak.

-- 
Julie Marchant
http://onpon4.github.io

Encrypt your emails with GnuPG:
https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org