Re: [Savannah-hackers] Re: Submission got lost?

[Hugo Gayosso]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Mathieu Roy <address@hidden> writes:

> Richard Stallman <address@hidden> said:
> 
> > MIT Scheme is an established product with many users, so there is no
> > need to try to evaluate whether it is useful, whether it works, or
> > whether it is well written.  We can assume it is all of those things.
> 
> I find this argument strange. If there are rules for a project to be a
> GNU package, why "establishment" permits to skip them? For instance,
> Apache and Linux are established product with many users. Could they
> become GNU Package without evaluation?
> 
> Also, should we guess the status of each projects?
> 
> It seems unrational.

[...]

Not at all Mathieu, one of the important things that are evaluated is
if a program is useful for the GNU system.

So, if a program already have a considerable user population that
means that it is useful for a lot of people, which implies that it
makes sense to be part of the GNU system.

RMS statement does not imply that we should not evaluate it at all, he
says that we should focus on the other part of the evaluation.

Greetings,
- -- 
Hugo Gayosso
GNU Software Evaluators coordinator
http://www.gnu.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+B7ufMNObVRBZveYRAtBuAJ9vhHrCfFzqmWH6lDr3dZDDUt9fBACfbdw9
Yzxp1vzdnQIVJeIp3y2mHlA=
=2ZG8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----