[directory-discuss] FSF opinion on chromium, QtWebEngine, electron

[bill-auger]

i would like to ask about the FSF opinion of chromium and electron-based
programs - as you probably know there was a big controversy this year
over the chromium code-base and that caused parabola to remove and
blacklist chromium and all QtWebEngine and electron-based programs - no
one has heard any news of a change of opinion about this or any
investigation so that is how it remains today because parabola wants to
align with the FSF's opinion

recently though users have been noting that there are a number of such
programs listed in the directory[1][2] and the FSF has recently
published an interview promoting the QtWebEngine-based qupzilla
browser[3] so there are some mixed signals floating about and parabola
has no clear answers to tell the users who want these programs restored

has there been any change in the FSF opinion of chromium? if no, should
those programs be removed from the directory? or if yes, could parabola
restore them to their repos?

[1]: https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Visual_Studio_Code
[2]: https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Atom
[3]:
https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/the-licensing-and-compliance-lab-interviews-david-rosca-of-qupzilla

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature