On 8/15/21 9:06 PM, Paul Wise wrote: > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 2:22 AM Antonio Russo wrote: > >> "Can one advertise non-free services in a Debian package? >> Is doing so a violation of some Debian policy? > > There is no specific rule against this, but I feel that culturally > Debian generally doesn't like this.
+1 > >> The details are filed against firefox[-esr], #992208 [1] (which was >> summarily closed without very much discussion). The non-free services in >> question are Amazon, YouTube, Facebook, Reddit, and Twitter. > > I'd like to see those removed too, but ... > > I expect removing these might violate the Firefox trademark license, > which would mean we would have to go back to the Iceweasel branding. I feel like if we are forced to rebrand Debian's browser to ensure user freedoms, then we simply must do so. I'd rather support Firefox/Mozilla, but I don't think we should allow ourselves to be bullied. > The Debian users who are aren't against non-free services would likely > get confused/annoyed if standard web services for their country were > to disappear. I agree; we should try to find localized equivalents in other regions, or simply provide no suggestions. People who will miss something, would know how to get to it. >> I would propose we replace these with things like lemmy, mastadon, peertub, >> matrix, framasoft, fsf.org, and debian.org. > > These are mostly names of software rather than services, unless you > suggest to point at specific hosted instances of these software > projects. https://joinpeertube.org/ https://join-lemmy.org/ https://joinmastodon.org/ https://view.matrix.org/ All provide some listing of instances (in fact, my preliminary patch points to these). They're relatively sparse, but that's more of a chicken-or-egg problem: If even Debian doesn't bother referring people to our FOSS allies, how are they supposed to grow? - Antonio
OpenPGP_0xB01C53D5DED4A4EE.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
