Replacement applications on nonfree systems

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ 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. ]]]

  > Yes, that's how we should use those pages.
  > However, we can review those replacement programs without giving them
  > entries of their own.

  How? If anyone look at the source they will not find any review notes 

There is no need to publish the review notes.  That is extra work.

  >  What do you think about that by the way, a License column?

It would not be wrong to state that info, but it would be unnecessary
extra work.  Better if we don't/

Listing information about programs for use on Windows, etc, is not the
main goal of the directory.  So please don't propose ways to do extra
work and "do a better job".  It does a good enough job now.  Let's
aim to make it less work, instead.

  > To verify that the license is free and to avoid adding programs with
  > nonfree software dependencies by mistake (as Adonay pointed out earlier).

Are you talking about putting these comments the directory pages that
the public can see?  If so, that approach has a big problem: is that
it assumes people are posting the names of "replacement" programs
before checking they are valid to list.

Or at least, that's how it seems to me.  Did I misunderstand that
plan, somehow?

We should weed out invalid replacement programs _before_ they get into
the published version of the pages.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)