Re: [GNU-linux-libre] Relationships with other distros and other things

[bill-auger]

On Sat, 29 May 2021 00:14:12 -0300 Adonay wrote:
> some possible issue for many of the free/libre distros

if that is referring to the FSF-endorsed distros, then its not
obvious that any of those questions are an issue - they are
mainly asking about other distros, which are not 100% libre, and
have no interest in the FSDG


On Sat, 29 May 2021 00:14:12 -0300 Adonay wrote:
> 1. Is there any work being done with distros that don't meet the FSDG but are 
> still the base for those who do, in the sense that someday both projects can 
> be merged into the older one

it is not something that this work-group would do - its not
a general question either; because in reality, there are only two
current examples: arch and debian

arch and debian distros have existed for 20+ years, and they
have their own policies/guidelines for which software fits into
the distro - as it pertains to this work-group, the essential
policy is that they both allow non-free software in their repos
- if that was not the case, then parabola, pureos, and trisquel
would not exist, and would have no reason to

it is not likely that any distros would change their policy
so drastically after 20 years, to become 100% libre, if that
was not already a stated goal from the beginning


On Sat, 29 May 2021 00:14:12 -0300 Adonay wrote:
> 2. should distros that don't meet the FSDG be called “non-free” across the 
> documentation of GNU.org

generally, no - there are several reasons, beyond licensing,
for why some 100% free software may not be FSDG-fit - a large
percentage (probably the majority) of the arch packages which
parabola replaces or rejects, are 100% free software; but are
treated for other FSDG prescriptions - if you are looking for
terminology to describes the difference, i have been using
"FSDG-fit/FSDG-unfit" - that is very different than "free vs
non-free"


On Sat, 29 May 2021 00:14:12 -0300 Adonay wrote:
> 3. Is there any work being made to change the current FSDG so as to also 
> demand free/libre culture 

no - the FSF has always considered artwork to be "non-functional
data" (its not software) - to meet the FSDG, it only needs to be
freely re-distributable - however, in practice, most artwork
which is freely re-distributable, naturally qualifies as
"free-culture", because most have an explicitly libre license
(FAL, FDL, CC-BY) - trademark logos and works under the
non-commercial CC, are are the most common exception - those
preclude freedom #0 (and so are not "free-culture"); but they are
a small minority over-all


On Sat, 29 May 2021 00:14:12 -0300 Adonay wrote:
> 4. For the common distros found to be non-compliant with FSDG, are there 
> registries of issues opened in their trackers regarding the findings made?

no - this work-group is concerned with distros which are
currently endorsed, and those which have asked to be evaluated -
i dont believe that any "common distro" has been "found" to be
FSDG-fit nor unfit; because distros are not evaluated for their
FSDG-fitness, unless the distro maintainers ask to be evaluated