Rosen Penev <ros...@gmail.com> writes: > https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria-evaluation.html seems to be > complete garbage. Seems the higher the criteria, the less users.
Yes, I encourage everyone to read that page. Personally, it made me worry more about the FSFs definition of freedom than using github... IMHO, upholding the laws of the national state you operate in is good. We all know by now that is is possible to define a state as "good", "bad" or "evil". But regardless of how you categorize the US, I think it would be far worse if Github didn't obey US law by complying with current US sanctions. Requiring non-free javascript for browser access. OK, valid point. But really? That battle was lost 20 years ago. Don't use a browser if you dislike non-free javascript. Couldn't even find librejs or icecat in Debian, but that might just be me? Github tries to be transparent about government takedowns, publishing as much as they can on https://github.com/github/gov-takedowns . This seems to be used as an argument against github? Where do I find the complete list of government takedonws affecting savannah.gnu.org projects? There is none? Well, THAT worries me. A lot. And then we have the big licensing argument. As a GPL project, why should you care whether the hosting site forces other hosted projects to use GPL (or other free) licensing? Which sites deserves the "libre" label: The site allowing any license, or the site allowing only FSF approved licenses? Looks like the FSF "freedom" is pretty limited to me. Bjørn _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
