[Top][All Lists]

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

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

From: Robert Call
Subject: Re: [GNU-linux-libre] DSFG in perpetuity
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2018 11:28:25 -0400

On Sun, 2018-03-25 at 11:58 +0200, Zlatan Todoric wrote:
> 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.

Yelling "this list is toxic" does not help you or anyone else. Both
Purism and PureOS did this to themselves with the long list of problems
from the start. While I don't agree with Bill's stance, I would say
that more time is needed to get over these issues. Being entailed and
asserting that everyone must forgive you for past issues right now is
not going to get you very far and you must have the patience.

Many of us are willing to forgive PureOS and Purism for past issues,
but it is going to take more time for Purism and PureOS to show they
are dedicated to the Free Software movement. Many of us in the Free
Software community are still concerned about some of the current
actions and behavior of Purism and the lack of community around PureOS.

If you are wanting to fix these issues, it is going to take time and I
encourage Purism and the PureOS team to reach out to those who have
been a part of the Free Software community for a while instead of
making guesses and taking a few stabs in the dark. Many of us have been
doing this for a long time and we have the wounds to show for it. If in
doubt, reach out.

Robert Call (Bob)

reply via email to

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