From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Simon Nielsen Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add ungoogled-chromium. Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 20:22:20 +0100 Message-ID: <5345711550517740@myt1-e20b74e6250c.qloud-c.yandex.net> References: <20190202192023.22087-1-mbakke@fastmail.com> <87k1igpwk8.fsf@dismail.de> <20190203235204.63970587@parabola> <87sgx3mbcq.fsf@gnu.org> <87tvhf5f8d.fsf@dustycloud.org> <20190216030021.374f4c82@parabola> <87va1kav33.fsf@posteo.net> <87lg2f5wqk.fsf@posteo.net> <87k1hz5wh8.fsf@posteo.net> <20190216203933.218dfb67@parabola> <87bm3axcyl.fsf@elephly.net> <20190218070557.12fc0471@parabola> <87wolxyzx4.fsf@nckx> Reply-To: Workgroup for fully free GNU/Linux distributions Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <87wolxyzx4.fsf@nckx> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: gnu-linux-libre-bounces+gldg-gnu-linux-libre=m.gmane.org@nongnu.org Sender: "gnu-linux-libre" To: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice , "guix-devel@gnu.org" Cc: "gnu-linux-libre@nongnu.org" List-Id: guix-devel.gnu.org 18.02.2019, 14:44, "Tobias Geerinckx-Rice" : > If this is the quality of argument that =E2=80=98won=E2=80=99 over Pure= OS, it's > blaming Guix/Ricardo for not being around to stop others from > being bullied. > > Kind regards, > > T G-R Hi Tobias, I've been reading this conversation from the outside but noticed it seems= to be shifting to a meta rather than about the state of chromium itself so it would be nice if it = went back on topic. =E2=80=8C Seeing as the issue here relates to being uncertain shouldn't upstream co= nfirm which parts run under what license in more detail? As I can tell so far this hasn't been = done (unless I've missed something) thus the current situation. So the choice here is really about following the FSDG for now until it's = revised or going against it causing a split in the community around it. Guix would be in the right bu= t depending on the result there's a chance for a negative return (or a positive one). Are most here= sure which direction it will go? From just reading the snippets about PureOS they seemed to have = gotten quite a bit of flack until it was removed, won't the same happen to Guix? I've enjoyed using Guix for a bit over a year now and will continue regar= dless of the outcome. I apologize if this email is in conflict with the standard format as I us= ually don't engage in responding to mailing lists so my interpretation of the desired style might not be a= s accurate as of yet. Thank you Simon Nielsen