[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] [GNU-linux-libre] programming language package

From: Felipe Sanches
Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] [GNU-linux-libre] programming language package manager
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 22:59:58 -0300

It may sound weird what I'm saying, given that this topic is about
programming language packages... But we gotta remember that there's
also kids who're starting to learn, so they may not be yet
knowledgeable enough to discern these things in the beginning.

On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:58 PM, Felipe Sanches <> wrote:
> Software Freedom is important for everybody. Not only for programmers.
> Thus, a freedom that can only be easily validated by people with
> programming skills is a sort of discriminatory freedom.
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 9:38 PM, IngeGNUe <> wrote:
>> On 04/04/16 20:01, Ali Abdul Ghani wrote:
>>>> I'm confused about why this is necessary. Why not check the license of a
>>>> package before installing it? A programmer should be able to do this.
>>> Since  we have  distros
>>>  is endorsed by the FSF, mere warning is not enough.
>>> One of the criteria for keeping the endorsed status is that
>>> FSF-endorsed distros:
>>> "...must not steer users towards obtaining any nonfree information for
>>> practical use, or encourage them to do so. The system should have no
>>> repositories
>>> for nonfree software and no specific recipes for installation of
>>> particular nonfree programs. Nor should the distribution refer to
>>> third-party repositories
>>> that are not committed to only including free software; even if they
>>> only have free software today, that may not be true tomorrow. Programs
>>> in the system
>>> should not suggest installing nonfree plugins, documentation, and so on."
>>> have fun and be free
>>> ali miracle
>>> 2016-04-04 14:47 جرينتش-07:00, IngeGNUe <>:
>>>> On 04/03/16 18:37, Felipe Sanches wrote:
>>>>> I've been concerned for a while about this as well.
>>>>> Any idea if anyone has ever tried dealing with this problem already?
>>>>> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ali Abdul Ghani <>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Most of us use Package manager to install Programs
>>>>>> in fully free gnu/linux distributions all the repositorys is free
>>>>>> software
>>>>>> But wait
>>>>>> this seme not tru
>>>>>> A lot of programming languages have own Package Manager
>>>>>> Examples of those packages managers: npm (CSS/JavaScript), Bower
>>>>>> (Web), pip (Python), Ruby Gems (Ruby),
>>>>>> CPAN (Perl), Cargo (Rust), ...
>>>>>> These packages rely on special Repositorys
>>>>>> Nearly all of those Repositorys accept non-free licenses. At least,
>>>>>> most of those Repositorys show the license of the program, but it
>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>> even warn you when installing a non-free package.
>>>>>> and The big problem is python and Perl is part from
>>>>>> fully free gnu/linux distributions
>>>>>> I think this mene the distributions is not fully free gnu/linux
>>>>>> distributions
>>>>>> There are 2 solutions came in my head
>>>>>> 1- remove this Package Manager from this programming languages from
>>>>>> free gnu/linux distributions
>>>>>> in fact If we're removing those package managers, it's going to make
>>>>>> installing some software much harder.
>>>>>> 2. Create a separate repository. In this case, we hnede  manpower to
>>>>>> mirror all the free packages and remove only the non-free ones, else
>>>>>> we will
>>>>>> land in a situation similar to 1. we will also need a pretty Web
>>>>>> interface in order to attract users.
>>>>>> have fun and be free
>>>>>> ali miracle
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Emacs is the ground. We run around and act silly on top of it, and
>>>>>> when we die, may our remnants grace its ongoing incrementation.
>>>> I'm confused about why this is necessary. Why not check the license of a
>>>> package before installing it? A programmer should be able to do this.
>>>> Tell me if I am wrong?
>>>> If you feel like that's a good use of your time, go for it...
>> Hello Ali,
>> What I mean by that is not even a warning. A programmer is sophisticated
>> enough of a user to look at the license of a package if she cares enough
>> about the issue. Therefore, i find it dubious what value it adds to
>> bother with this.
>> Besides that, there should be a limit to what distros are responsible
>> for; I believe that the responsibility of a distro is to distribute
>> libre packages; if those libre packages then download non-libre packages
>> distributed by somebody else, then the distro should not be responsible
>> for that. I think that's the only sane option because otherwise y'all
>> gettin way too meta.

reply via email to

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