[Top][All Lists]

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

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

From: Zlatan Todoric
Subject: Re: [GNU-linux-libre] DSFG in perpetuity
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2018 11:58:53 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:58.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/58.0

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).

> * 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.

> 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.


reply via email to

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