Em 04/02/2019 02:52, bill-auger escreveu:
> re: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2019-02/msg00009.html
> 
> i would like to remind readers of the guix-devel list that it was
> discussed some months ago, why no FSDG distros currently distribute
> chromium[1] - it appeared at that time, that most people in that
> discussion were in agreement that chromium should not be included in
> guix; and marius was instead hosting it in a private repo, as not to
> taint the main guix repos with dubious software - has there been a
> notable break-through since then?
> 
> what is the evidence for this claim that this guix package is "free
> software only"? - what does "Marks beautiful computed-origin-method" do
> toward that end? - if a procedure for liberating any chromium-derived
> software has been discovered, this would be a marvelous accomplishment
> and very good news indeed, of which people outside of the guix dev team
> would also be interested to learn

On this matter, I think this discussion and also the review should be
tracked either in a bug report or in the Free Software Directory wiki
talk page about Chromium package/entry[1], this one also has a partial
review still to be finished. Besides, the last time I read the FSD's
entry inclusion requirements (about June, 2018) I was informed also in
IRC that they have plans to make the FSD mimic the requirements of the
GNU FSDG so that free/libre system distributions would have an easier
time getting a list of reviewed packages for inclusion. That means that
the FSD would also have the requirements from the GNU FSDG regarding not
including malware and not steering towards non-free functional data.
There are optional things to consider, for which the Antifeature Project
Team is working on drafting[2], although these are not requirements for
inclusion in the FSD.

Regarding the review results in the page referenced by [1], please keep
in mind that the torrents have no trackers, so please share/seed with
DHT and PEX enabled so others can discover the shares too.

Another alternative is of course to ditch Chromium and
Ungoogled-Chromium and focus on Iridium Browser[3].

Anyways, if you do want to see progress in the Chromium review, please
contribute by downloading, seeding and also actually reviewing parts of
the reports generated. The last stop is marked with "Continue.". I did
start the review, but I'm not the most experienced person in regards to
all of legal, security and privacy matters. Just remember to remake a
torrent with the modified report and change the old hash in the page to
the new one you're seeding if you do make changes to the report, and
mark/save the change as major so that other people get notified.

Lastly, bill-auger's question of which should be the "assumed value" for
the GNU FSDG compliance status of a unreviewed package, based on various
proofs related to the dangers of non-free software (well, gnu.org has a
page with these reports/news[4]) and also on the reasoning given by
Richard Stallman in his talks[5], the unreviewed entries should be
considered non-free.

[1] https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Talk:Chromium
[2] https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Free_Software_Directory:Antifeatures
[3] https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Iridium_Browser
[4] https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/proprietary.html
[5]
http://audio-video.gnu.org/video/2015-10-24--rms--free-software-and-your-freedom--seagl--speech.ogv