[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ELPA] New package: repology.el

From: Richard Stallman
Subject: Re: [ELPA] New package: repology.el
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2021 00:03:49 -0500

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > One of the listed goals is "Prohibit redistribution and use of Nmap
  > within proprietary hardware and software products."

That goal sounds like it might conflict with the free software
definition.  I say "might" because I can't tell from just that.
Maybe this is ok, maybe not.  It would take some thought.

What do they mean by "proprietary hardware products"?  The meaning is
not obvious, so we do not classify "hardware" as free or proprietary.
(See https://gnu.org/philosophy/free-hardware-designs.html.)

In any case, it is not their _goals_ that would either satisfy the
free software definition or not.  Rather, it is their actual _license_
that would make the difference.  The goals might help interpret it,
or might show what license changes they want to make.

Would you like to email me their current license text plus what they
say about its goals?

Did someone say that they were continuing to adjust their license
and what they are using is not final?  I think so.

Anyway, if repology.org has a general practice of listing only free
software, I would not criticize it for having difficulty with an
unclear case like this.

What matters for judging repology.org is its general policy.
Can someone show me that?
Dr Richard Stallman
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]