Hi,
> Free Software is meaningless without having free users, users that
> aren't able to take control of their software are not free users,
> they're slaves to the creators of the software.
That's what I meant. If the FSF (or Debian) says:
"It is absolutely unacceptable to run non-free softwar
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 07:49:37PM +0100, Dominik George wrote:
> Just out of curiosity: What's their definition of freedom anyway?
>
> Forcing the user to not use non-free software takes away their freedom,
> but probably the FSF does not get that, or they wouldn't be pushing the
> GPL so badly.
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 08:13:29PM +0100, Dominik George wrote:
>> > > Just out of curiosity: What's their definition of freedom anyway?
>> >
>> > You don't know what their definition of freedom is, but continue to
>> > assess their religious
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 08:13:29PM +0100, Dominik George wrote:
> > > Just out of curiosity: What's their definition of freedom anyway?
> >
> > You don't know what their definition of freedom is, but continue to
> > assess their religious views? This doesn't look very useful to me.
>
> I know ve
> > Just out of curiosity: What's their definition of freedom anyway?
>
> You don't know what their definition of freedom is, but continue to
> assess their religious views? This doesn't look very useful to me.
I know very well what their definition of freedom is. My question
challenges the vald
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 07:49:37PM +0100, Dominik George wrote:
> > Correct. Unfortunately I haven't heard much else either. Discussions
> > went on on the fsf-collab-discuss list on alioth, but the state of the
> > art is still that we're waiting for the FSF to refine current freeness
> > assessme
> Correct. Unfortunately I haven't heard much else either. Discussions
> went on on the fsf-collab-discuss list on alioth, but the state of the
> art is still that we're waiting for the FSF to refine current freeness
> assessment into more actionable items.
Just out of curiosity: What's their defi
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 12:06:43PM -0500, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> zack@ was the last person to work with the FSF on this, and I've not
> heard much else.
Correct. Unfortunately I haven't heard much else either. Discussions
went on on the fsf-collab-discuss list on alioth, but the state of the
ar
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 06:45:50PM +0400, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
> Any news, current status?
None that I know. I'd be really interested in working with the FSF in a
way that helps us both out a lot, and I'd really love to get an official
endorsement. I know it'll be hard, and I know it'll requi
Hello,
> I think we should either get Debian in FSF [free-distros list][1], or
> document (from our POV) why Debian is not there. I'm looking for Debian
> volunteers interested in the topic and willing to participate in a joint
> Debian / FSF team that will work toward that goal without prejudices
Stefano Zacchiroli writes ("working with FSF on Debian Free-ness assessment"):
> TL;DR
Well done!
> This triaging work is the work for which I'm looking for volunteers.
I would love to help. Full disclosure: I'm a GNU maintainer and
longstanding supporter of GNU and
TL;DR
-
I think we should either get Debian in FSF [free-distros list][1], or
document (from our POV) why Debian is not there. I'm looking for Debian
volunteers interested in the topic and willing to participate in a joint
Debian / FSF team that will work toward that goal without prejudices.
T
12 matches
Mail list logo
