Re: official Emacs Docker image

[Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>]

[[[ 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. ]]]

  > Docker Inc., who runs the Docker Hub. They essentially own the top
  > namespace, so pulling "ubuntu" gets the official Ubuntu image, while
  > "rms/ubuntu" is under the "rms" (usually a user name) namespace.

Needless to say, Docker's label of "official" carries no weight in the
GNU Project.  I don't know what Docker's criteria for an "official"
distribution are, so I am not ready to reach any conclusion about what
stance we should take towards that.

  > What's the plan for coming to a position? Is there some timeframe, or
  > some milestones, that have to be reached? Will the discussions be
  > private and then an announcement made?

I don't have a formal plan like that for studying a question.

We discussed docker containers and reached the conclusion
that there is nothing inherently wrong with them.  So it is ok
for GNU packages to make and distribute them.

I will ask some advisors to look at the Docker site and see what is
good or bad about it.  Some of the criteria for source repositories
(http://gnu.org/software/repo-criteria.html will be relevant, though
others will not be.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (gnu.org, fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (internethalloffame.org)
Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html.