Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add ungoogled-chromium.

[bill-auger <bill-auger@peers.community>]

On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 02:46:30 -0500 Ineiev wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 03, 2019 at 11:52:04PM -0500, bill-auger wrote:
> > the main, central FSDG concern: which programs are
> > freely distributable and which are not  
> 
> I don't think the main FSDG concern is which programs are freely
> distributable, and even which programs are free

geez, i almost erased that bit before sending it too :( - to be clear:
by "freely distributable" i totally meant "provides all five of the
four freedoms"

i will append just this - the issue here is really quite simple to
express - one (and only one) of the following statements must be true:

* the chromium software provides all of the four freedoms
* the chromium software does not provide all of the four freedoms

there is no third option

according to the FSDG, qualifying distros are free to distribute any
software that is known to provide all of the four freedoms; and must
not distribute any software that does not meet that standard - we can
all agree on this so far - yes?

therefore, both of the following statements must be true:

* IF chromium provides all of the four freedoms, then any FSDG distro
  is free to distribute it, if they so choose

* IF chromium is not known to provide all of the four freedoms, or is
  known to not provide all of the four freedoms, then none of the
  FSDG distros should choose to distribute it; and any that does,
  should have a freedom bug posted against it immediately, just as
  happened with pureos

does anyone disagree with either of those two statements?

the FSDG itself is not really the issue here - it is quite clear on
most matters - the problem is that no one knows for certain which one
of those two statements is the actual case in reality - so the key
concerns are: "who shall make that determination?", and "by which
standards?"

should software be considered to be provide all of the four freedoms
until proven otherwise? (e.g. because someone slapped an MIT on top of
it) - or should software be considered to not necessarily provide all
of the four freedoms until proven to do so?

should each distro decide for itself what qualifies as FSDG-free
software and what does not? - or would such decisions be better made by
consensus with the guidance of the FSF?