Greg Farough <gregf@gnu.org> writes:
On Mon, Oct 25 2021, Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <ams@gnu.org> writes:
I was asking for a clarification of GNU project policy.
As I mentioned earlier,
https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria-evaluation.html
lists GitHub as unacceptable for hosting of GNU software.
That is your answer, what is there else to clarify?
Well, why there are 2 GNU projects developed on GitHub.
It's strongly discouraged, and we should try to persuade them
to do
otherwise, but my understanding is that GNU maintainers are
allowed
to
have repositories on GitHub. They already make other, similar
decisions on their own about the program they maintain.
The actual GNU maintainer policy document is linked below, in
which
Savannah is recommended, but not mandated.
<https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Hosting>
Thanks for the link. I think hosting is not as big a problem as
development, which is mentioned briefly in other messages in
this
thread. Developers and potential contributors shouldn't be
required
to give up their freedom for development and discussions. The
maintainer policy document[1] at
<https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Ethical-and-Philosophical-Consideration>
also says:
Similarly, a GNU package should not require the use of non-free
software, including JavaScript, for the coordination of its
development. For example, please don’t use Transifex for
translation
of your software because it requires your translators to use
non-free,
JavaScript-based editing tools. Instead, a service without any
ethical
concerns should be used, such as The Translation Project
(https://translationproject.org).
Please don’t host discussions about your package in a service
that
requires nonfree software. For instance, Google+ “communities”
require running a nonfree JavaScript program to post a message,
so
they can’t be used in the Free World. Google Groups has the
same
problem. To host discussions there would be excluding people
who
live
by free software principles.