From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jean Louis Subject: Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 06:15:44 +0200 Message-ID: <20191010041543.GY20430@protected.rcdrun.com> References: <87ftk4hbhu.fsf@gnu.org> <87wodfi44x.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:33631) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iIPrj-00035e-FC for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 00:15:52 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iIPri-0000oL-7G for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 00:15:51 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: zimoun Cc: Guix Devel , Dimakakos Dimos , GNU Guix maintainers * zimoun [2019-10-08 16:19]: > Hi, >=20 > First, just to give numbers about what means 18 GNU maintainers. Here > [1] is the list of the GNU packages. I let you count but I guess the > list is more than 300 packages. Therefore, one can guess that the GNU > maintainers are more than 300. > Well, even if these 18 people are awesome, there are 18 compared to > more than 300. Therefore, now this statement is just a call. >=20 > [1] https://www.gnu.org/manual/blurbs.html GNU project can still fork the software and use any free software and continue without problems. > Second, we can complain about the wording of the statement, the > publishing way, asking for concrete facts, etc. but this statement is > not a surprise. Is it? Really? To me it is a big X$%*&#X surprise because it is published with money that RMS provided for them to publish it, on RMS's domain, to defame and harass RMS. I have nothing against free speech, I am against abusing GNU project on the GNU project resources. In fact, they shall step down and remove themselves from GNU and build whatever project they wish to build. That is a hostile take over attempt with authority, power and funds as purpose. > It would have perhaps been better received if the 18 signatories did > as Thomas Bushnell [2]: speaking individually about their own > experience [3] of long time contributor. But does it change their key > point: "We believe that Richard Stallman cannot represent all of > GNU."? Exactly, I have absolutely nothing to say against publishing their opinions on their own websites. That is exactly what RMS is doing, he publishes his opinions on https://www.stallman.org Jean I am asking those people who are pretending to represent all of the GNU project and who are defaming and slandering RMS[1] to step down and resign, do your software hacking somewhere else, you do not deserve funding that RMS is giving you. Ludovic Court=C3=A8s, Ricardo Wurmus, Matt Lee, Andreas Enge, Samuel Thibault, Carlos O'Donell, Andy Wingo, Jordi Guti=C3=A9rrez Hermoso, Mark Wielaard, Ian Lance Taylor, Werner Koch, Daiki Ueno, Christopher Lemmer Webber, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, John Wiegley, Tom Tromey, Jeff Law, Han-Wen Nienhuys, Joshua Gay, Ian Jackson, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, Andrej Shadura, Zack Weinberg, John W. Eaton, RESIGN and step down from GNU projects, disassociate yourself, find another house for your excessive and uncrontollable fear of the free speech. Facts: https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/ https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/