Re: [GNU-linux-libre] Adding some scummvm game(s) to the "List of software that does not respect the Free System Distribution Guidelines"

[bill-auger]

On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 21:28:41 -0400 Richard wrote:
> Could we possibly help and encourage people who develop games in JS
> to release them also so that a user can install a game on per own computer?

not likely - for the most part, software freedom runs "against the grains" of
that desire for ephemeral distribution - developers target web browsers for
their applications, precisely so that users never need to install anything (not
even the web browser) - the unfortunate corollary is that user can _not_ install
those applications for offline use; but that is not seen as an important use
case, neither by web developers nor web fans

just like proprietary software, the user-base prefers convenience; and the
publisher retains total control over every aspect of the user's experience -
both are complacent in that arrangement

if the terms: "off-line" and "local copy", are present in a web fan's
vocabulary, they are synonyms for "a return to the stone age" (a world in which
they see no use for a personal computer) - "audit-able" and "reproducible" are
entirely foreign concepts - you may as well ask them to distribute daily floppy
disk releases via snail-mail (postmarked: 1993, addressed to Grandpa)

it not simply suggesting an alternate use-case, but more of a paradigm shift,
away from what modern software development and distribution is perceived to
entail - the only place for a real OS in that workflow, is behind the scenes, on
a third-party automated freebie build service - even their favorite text editors
are written in HTML+javascript, running on a web engine, in constant
communication with someone else's remote server (login credentials required, of
course)

the web browsers, though freely licensed native programs, are not much better
(disposable software, out-dated upon-use) - they are something of a macrocosm of
the javascript applications they run within - "disposable software" is endemic
to the culture - mozilla for example, releases up to 5 times per month - most
users get automatic binary replacements upon launching the browser; and many
prefer the unstable daily replacements - even freedoms #0 and #2 have an
extremely short "shelf-life"; and to exercise the others, requires several
hours per release, to scrutinize the changes and re-compile - i doubt that many
users do so, or even want to; though most do expect to install and use each new
version, immediately upon release

the difference between the browser and the "browsed" applications, is that
rather than convenience being a major factor, it is the combination of
security/privacy fears, the massive size of the code-base, and the unreasonable
_inconvenience_ of keeping pace with the rapid release cycle, which is the major
deterrent of software freedom