[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nano-devel] Should nano stay a GNU program (Was: time for a 2.5.4-p
Re: [Nano-devel] Should nano stay a GNU program (Was: time for a 2.5.4-pre1?)
Sat, 07 May 2016 12:45:50 +0200
On Fri, May 6, 2016, at 18:24, Chris Allegretta wrote:
> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 3:29 AM, Benno Schulenberg
> <address@hidden> wrote:
> > As you know, I will not assign my copyright to the FSF, nor to
> > anyone else. All the code I write is GPL'ed. You don't need to
> > own the copyright on any code in order to be able to enforce the
> > GPL. [...]
> Indeed, and in fact for a long time the copyright was owned by me
> before it was assigned to the FSF. It's not required per se, but
> generally speaking, there must be a Maintainer of the Software who
> believes in the ideals of the GNU system
I do believe in the ideal of the GNU system: to have computer systems
that consist entirely of libre software.
> and will adhere to the GNU coding standards
That is too bureaucratic, not libre enough.
> > Github is no good; it is a closed system. If you move to github,
> > then I'm done.
> Sorry (and a bit surprised) you feel that way. Closed is a pretty
> general statement,
Github hosts a lot of libre software, but is itself not libre. I find
that jarring. Plus, in order to use their services, you need to assume
liability; and I will not be liable for anything. Savannah does not ask
any such thing.
> and I imagine there are few truly Free Software
> hosting sites.
True. But Savannah is, and Savannah is fine. Even if nano stops
being a GNU package, we can still continue to use Savannah.
http://www.fastmail.com - Same, same, but different...