From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:4876::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms13.migadu.com with LMTPS id AKsOLTDjdmZYCQAAe85BDQ:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 22 Jun 2024 14:44:00 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:4876::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2.migadu.com with LMTPS id AKsOLTDjdmZYCQAAe85BDQ (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 22 Jun 2024 16:44:00 +0200 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none ("invalid DKIM record") header.d=msavoritias.me header.s=20210930 header.b=hOXm5iHQ; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=msavoritias.me (policy=none) ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1719067440; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=y/cEe9/xoPJv5OIOAVVdcIF0S7eZkI1BYZVMq+irH1s=; b=to2S9FveQ3YySYTrPmcPEGcui6kMdDsihiWmlCV+JK7Zzv6tXQzP2gGcTJyZs6YlOgTBkY LyOh1w97aP/lmam2WnsjX/+vjCh5VWskyjId3K3ljsQe4ZdiOh7xpw8tYUUAEe0zj6OO/m SQkOH77p4zRd+y3HItBiFa8x/KGsyrLtL1UNPZLYkYwK9Bvpjnp0YPuLawb+R9bII1UgWt w04sTg+xeyLZmWSY+58gHtzOuKFqfrJm0g9w3gOWqoA8r9/3NvAwpHMdyR0AjoEY7AUV6z rOIfjDhZq+dr7RF5SmyZ8uBdZRYpEYR0ltVQM2oWV5i2yJk26JQM7WDcMe6TSw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none ("invalid DKIM record") header.d=msavoritias.me header.s=20210930 header.b=hOXm5iHQ; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=msavoritias.me (policy=none) ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1719067440; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=jjidPtilEJJTgPb2Cb2HpAZKpdjPWmQ7qYP1BQff9brtL0nY1xrmIJ5DZrLReBsSiki7L7 DjGTNA7ouUzKitAzkfg7ptPaQ6mZVWmnuqLA4guTbD9RKRl9SAgOM0KXYfTX+dg5o34dSM UaENdBJbhZa0np41N2gpV60BoB1k7fLwPkyWXTWYxCrTvKGSfQuE8iavC2aFJLaohRERNO ihRB1/wEnFNP2FF0lUDVgfroDI8R155lfe29nJbqKyP2GQhR5GOTc86eAxha3TLFA7nNgs P5CazZr8RUSEDhijG+8b19bqfRa15aaj6Mvy04mEbLZ1uG4xZ8yBOZdMLsuGMg== Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8704C2465B for ; Sat, 22 Jun 2024 16:44:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sL1xO-0004qV-T0; Sat, 22 Jun 2024 10:43:10 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sL1xN-0004qE-3Z for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 22 Jun 2024 10:43:09 -0400 Received: from mail.webarch.email ([81.95.52.48]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sL1xL-0002eG-4S for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 22 Jun 2024 10:43:08 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Mailerdaemon) with ESMTPSA id 8542E1A8346A; Sat, 22 Jun 2024 15:42:59 +0100 (BST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=msavoritias.me; s=20210930; t=1719067384; h=from:subject:date:message-id:to:cc:mime-version:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:references; bh=y/cEe9/xoPJv5OIOAVVdcIF0S7eZkI1BYZVMq+irH1s=; b=hOXm5iHQinm2F1dzmNlIR+mdknjLVN5EeBCoVmkBdF8KqfgoRPGoxAvjsK+iY0vXkuA3V/ iK9ED3Wa8YOcWhrlWIiuuSh8Ux5vEdYKkNFSahylUkQwS2D3i1BmkOd6DxCcNfppnbu8vB o/odnybx5E2gi89g3/2k/pCdMtI9ZKH9LxkZ2FWm1V4ObJqP39/qDgT3IBDhNra7g23K63 +n4kuc+bd1KGLnzfpmBglzHavD7lPE/GwpkZ99ZRHJtzD52VILyxnAV7ltIPZGQTFhFOmp lmGqA5nsKeEdA2S+08w5ROhWDvtuPZ8Ef1mVkcL0CkhgJx6WSBjNGiHcaAJ9DA== Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2024 17:42:42 +0300 From: MSavoritias To: Richard Sent Cc: Andreas Enge , guix-devel@gnu.org Subject: Re: About SWH, let avoid the wrong discussion Message-ID: <20240622174242.7e1a18d5@fannys.me> In-Reply-To: <87zfrdazzn.fsf@freakingpenguin.com> References: <20240618113717.4a6bad2b@fannys.me> <87msnebsfd.fsf@gmail.com> <20240621121213.419da774@fannys.me> <20240621134439.5bc324b4@fannys.me> <87zfrdazzn.fsf@freakingpenguin.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.1.1 (GTK 3.24.41; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Last-TLS-Session-Version: TLSv1.3 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=81.95.52.48; envelope-from=email@msavoritias.me; helo=mail.webarch.email X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list 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+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Spam-Score: -1.36 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 8704C2465B X-Migadu-Scanner: mx10.migadu.com X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -1.36 X-TUID: gaopMpRNXdl4 On Sat, 22 Jun 2024 09:06:20 -0400 Richard Sent wrote: > Hi MSavoritias, > > MSavoritias writes: > > >> Well, the opt-in model is in place: As soon as I put my code under a free > >> license on the Internet, I opt in for it to be harvested by SWH (and anybody > >> else, including non-friendly companies and state actors). > > That may be how you have understood it but that is not how most people > > understand it. See for example mirroring videos that creators have > > made online, or more recently some activitypub software harvesting > > posts for a search engine. > > > > As I have been saying a lot in this thread (because there seem to be a > > lot of people in the Guix community not familiar that legal are not > > the same as social rules): > > I feel the need to jump in here because that first paragraph, to me, > implies that the silent members of the community agree with you. I do > not. > > Mirroring/archiving code released under a free license is different then > copying videos or posts that were not licensed. The two are so different > that opposition to the latter can't be compared to opposition to the > former. And yes, I do mean from a ethical perspective. These are wildly > different issues. > > > Saying that I can do whatever I want is a very reductionist point of > > view that I doubt would be acceptable inside Guix and FSF even. Given > > that GPL itself doesn't allow you to do whatever you want. > > Restrictions for the purpose of maximizing freedom are different then > restrictions for the purpose of limiting freedom. Thank you for proving my point :) That what "limits freedom" is very subjective that is. You have your opinion other people have yours. GPL has been called bad for restricting freedom after all if you dont know. > > Again as I wrote above legal has nothing to do with it really. Its > > about our social rules and what we have as common understanding in > > Guix. > > To some people (myself included), ensuring software is and remains free > IS an ethical rule (along with the contents of Guix's Contributor > Covenant of course). I do not believe any rules in said code of conduct > are being violated here. Does you ethics not include privacy and consent? Because mine do. see -> https://www.consentfultech.io > >> `-x archival` does it, but it is too easy to forget and once the cat is out > >> of the bag privacy is lost. I really think this should be default behaviour, > >> or > >> at least there should be a flag in the package definition. I would still be > >> uncomfortable with the last option, as everyone would be relying on the > >> collective of Guix maintainers to not screw up and accidentally leak private > >> data. > >> > >> Dale > > Yeah very much agree this should be the default behavior. Archiving > > should be opt-in to avoid any surprises for the person running it. I > > am surprised it became default actually. > > It is not my responsibility to ensure publicly available code released > under a FOSS license is not archived. It is the developers > responsibility to not release it under a FOSS license. (Perhaps nonfree > private channels would benefit from a change in the default behavior but > Guix should not tailor its defaults around such a use case.) > > I am opposed to any theoretical change in Guix's packaging policy that > restricts software freedom. This would include a system that allows for > marking individual packages as "do not upload to software heritage". > > To clarify. I am specifically opposed to a change in official Guix > packages that allows for this statement: > > "Do not upload automatically to software heritage, and no one else can > either." Let me put this more clear Richard, the statement above that archiving should be off by default means: - Guix respects the consent of the person using guix lint and their expectations. (that lint actually lints) - Respects their privacy - Respects their autonomy. Now if you want to disagree that people should have privacy or expectations then I fear we are becoming the next Google. Personally I do not want Guix to become the next google but I instead want to respect privacy, autonomy and consent. If you do not believe in these then I fear we have a fundamental disagreement here. Regards, MSavoritias