[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: A GNU “social contract”?
From: |
Ludovic Courtès |
Subject: |
Re: A GNU “social contract”? |
Date: |
Thu, 07 Nov 2019 21:46:56 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) |
Hi all,
Thanks, Andreas, for this new version! Some comments below.
ams@gnu.org (Alfred M. Szmidt) skribis:
> What is the exact _goal_ of this text?
We discussed it several times before, notably in these messages:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2019-10/msg00011.html
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2019-10/msg00081.html
> Apart from rare historical exceptions, all software written by the GNU
> Project
> is distributed under copyleft licenses, designed to ensure that developers
> cannot strip off users' freedom from GNU software.
>
> This would exclude those cases where we might want to distribute
> something under a non-copyleft license for strategical reasons.
I agree with Alfred. For that reason, I think the other phrasing you
proposed, Andreas, would be more appropriate:
Unless the GNU Project deems that a different choice furthers the
advancement of free software, all software...
> * The GNU Project provides a consistent system
>
> The GNU Project develops, in the form of GNU packages, an operating system
> and a set of applications, the GNU system. GNU package developers work
> together to ensure consistency across packages. GNU packages should follow
> the design and development guidelines of the GNU Project.
>
> The GNU system isn't just GNU packages, […]
I agree that there’s maybe some ambiguity in the first sentence.
Perhaps something like this:
The GNU Project develops an operating system, the “GNU System”, as
well as a set of applications. Each software component developed by
the GNU Project is referred to as a “GNU package”.
?
Nitpick: for clarity, I would use quotes (or italics) for every new term
being defined (as in the example above.)
Apart from that, it looks good to me! What do people think?
Thanks,
Ludo’.
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, (continued)
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Mark Wielaard, 2019/11/14
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2019/11/15
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss), 2019/11/15
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Dora Scilipoti, 2019/11/16
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Andreas, 2019/11/16
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Dora Scilipoti, 2019/11/16
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Dmitry Alexandrov, 2019/11/07
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?,
Ludovic Courtès <=
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2019/11/09
- Re: A GNU “social contract”?, Andreas Enge, 2019/11/09
- A purely GNU system? (Was: A GNU “social contract”?), Andreas Enge, 2019/11/09
- Re: A purely GNU system? (Was: A GNU “social contract”?), Alfred M. Szmidt, 2019/11/09
- Re: A purely GNU system?, Andreas Enge, 2019/11/09
- Re: A purely GNU system?, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2019/11/09
- Re: A purely GNU system?, Florian Weimer, 2019/11/09
- Re: A purely GNU system?, Joel Sherrill, 2019/11/09
- Re: A purely GNU system?, Andreas Enge, 2019/11/09
- Re: A purely GNU system?, Mark Wielaard, 2019/11/11