From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jean Louis Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.tangents Subject: Re: Privileges and practicalities [was: Re: [ELPA] New package: repology.el] Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2021 21:47:36 +0300 Message-ID: References: <87zh1jag72.fsf@gkayaalp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="34532"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mutt/2.0 (3d08634) (2020-11-07) Cc: emacs-tangents@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, ams@gnu.org, arthur.miller@live.com, dgutov@yandex.ru, =?utf-8?B?R8O2a3R1xJ8=?= Kayaalp , Eli Zaretskii To: Ulrich Mueller Original-X-From: emacs-tangents-bounces+get-emacs-tangents=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 08 19:51:23 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: get-emacs-tangents@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kxwr4-0008ri-MU for get-emacs-tangents@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2021 19:51:22 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38456 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kxwr3-0001V1-NA for get-emacs-tangents@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2021 13:51:21 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:33906) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kxwqt-0001Uo-M8 for emacs-tangents@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2021 13:51:11 -0500 Original-Received: from stw1.rcdrun.com ([217.170.207.13]:55219) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kxwqq-0000Vz-Q5; Fri, 08 Jan 2021 13:51:11 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([::ffff:41.210.145.70]) (AUTH: PLAIN securesender, TLS: TLS1.2,256bits,ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by stw1.rcdrun.com with ESMTPSA id 0000000000294DDE.000000005FF8A998.0000230F; Fri, 08 Jan 2021 11:51:04 -0700 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.170.207.13; envelope-from=bugs@gnu.support; helo=stw1.rcdrun.com X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-tangents@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs news and miscellaneous discussions outside the scope of other Emacs mailing lists List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-tangents-bounces+get-emacs-tangents=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-tangents" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.tangents:528 Archived-At: * Ulrich Mueller [2021-01-08 19:25]: > >>>>> On Fri, 08 Jan 2021, Jean Louis wrote: > > > What GNU project promotes is free software. GNU never says to its > > users to use exclusively free software and never condemns people for > > using proprietary software. > > Yet it maintains a blacklist of common GNU/Linux distros and labels them > as "unethical", even if these distros (like Debian and Fedora) have a > clear policy to exclude anything non-free from their main > repositories. I am not sure if I understand well. Do you perceive labeling some distros as unethical same as labeling users of the distro unethical? For me that is not the same. Majority of GNU/Linux users are not well informed about free software. pDecision makers are well informed and they make conscious decisions to provide access to proprietary software. For that set of people I would say they act in a way that is contrary to free software philosophy, they use it only technically without teaching people about it. So I say, they do act with lack of responsibility in that regards. They value their technical capabilities more than freedom of their users. > I am certain that these distro maintainers act in good faith if they > mention (for example) CPU microcode for Spectre mitigation in their > documentation, even if that microcode isn't free software. They may act in good faith. But that may not be aligned to free software principles. Good faith as general term is not same as good faith to provide fully free software OS. I do not think that GNU project ever said anything about mentioning any proprietary software in relation on how to liberate users. So what if people mention it? I see no problem mentioning proprietary software as long as we clearly say what is the problem with it. Example: https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-microsoft.html So there is mentioning of Microsoft Windows there many times. Problems are clearly listed with references for more understanding. Then, Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre https://www.hyperbola.info also mentions proprietary software and relevant software that is risk to software freedom in a package named `your-freedom' Example line from there is like: abiword:abiword:::[semifree] Hard-codes nonfree fonts, [uses-nonprivacy] has non-privacy search engines and translators e.g. Google search engine and the defunct AltaVista’s Babel Fish translator which queries are redirected to the main Yahoo! page Then maybe Hyperbola maintainers try to rectify it by changing something in that software. Or other example: acetoneiso2::fsf:AcetoneISO:[uses-nonfree] ask to download and install nonfree poweriso akonadi-calendar-tools::::[uses-nonfree] only useful with nonfree qt5-webengine apm::::[uses-nonfree] has no policy against distributing nonfree software through their online database of Atom packages, [uses-nonfree][uses-nonsecurity] make-depends on coffee-script and depends on npm ark:ark:::[uses-nonfree] recommends nonfree unrar As you may see, software that relates to proprietary is mentioned and nonfree software is mentioned, and purpose of mentioning it is to point out that it is nonfree. If we come back to repology.org server, they do not have the purpose to say distinguish, so they just follow data structure of packages they are pulling, regardless if such data structure does not speak or does speak about the license of the software. Jean