[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Subprojects in Savannah

From: Christopher Dimech
Subject: Re: Subprojects in Savannah
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 23:54:40 +0100

I acknowledge totally the introspection of Luis Falcon on this matter.


Christopher Dimech
General Administrator - Naiad Informatics - GNU Project (Geocomputation)
- Geophysical Simulation
- Geological Subsurface Mapping
- Disaster Preparedness and Mitigation
- Natural Resource Exploration and Production
- Free Software Advocacy

> Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2020 at 11:40 PM
> From: "Luis Falcon" <>
> To: "Alfred M. Szmidt" <>
> Cc:,
> Subject: Re: Subprojects in Savannah
> Hello, Alfred
> Thank you for your mail and for your comments.
> On Sun, 29 Nov 2020 04:33:03 -0500
> "Alfred M. Szmidt" <> wrote:
> >    Sorry, I've waited too long. I have started the migration o the GNU
> >    Health mercurial repository to OSDN. It's a pity, but it seems
> > like the requests over these years for the modernization of Savannah
> > have not been taken into consideration.
> >
> > They have, but like all volunteer projects -- someone has to do the
> > work.  Would you like to help with that?  Nothing will happen, nor
> > will it help Savannah or the GNU project if everyone does nothing.
> >
> Please, let's stop using the volunteer job as an excuse. Many of us
> volunteer in different projects, not just technical. Volunteering
> implies commitment.
> Don't take this personal, is not directed to anyone in particular. What
> I mean is that sysadmin or management o Savannah can not be something
> that we do in our spare time or if we feel like doing it.
> And yes, I have proposed different models and Libre platforms for
> Savannah. In my opinion, spending time patching an obsolete system is
> not the right approach.
> I could have created the repositories myself in 5 minutes, as I did in
> OSDN, if I had access to that resource. We need to be in full control
> of our resources.
> I don't want to get back to the old discussion on who is in charge of
> GNU resources, and who has access to the servers.
> > How is OSDN ranked on the GNU Ethical Repository list?  .
> You mean ?
> OSDN has not been evaluated by GNU, and I explained my criteria to
> choose it on the news.
> I find very worrisome that GNU approves platforms which deny access to
> citizens from some countries, like our friends from Cuba. Denying
> access to Libre social projects based on the country of residence or
> origin is an flagrant attack to human rights.
> > You say that it only hosts free software licesed projects, but that
> > isn't what they say -- the say open source licenses, this is not the
> > same.
> I agree, I don't like the term "Open Source", and I also try to avoid
> using the term "Free". I like to use the term "Libre". There might be
> OSI approved licenses that we might agree or disagree. We use GPL v3+.
> Some colleagues might like it and some other might use BSD for their
> projects. That is their choice and we should respect it the same way we
> want them to respect ours.
> >
> > I suggest that GNU health moves back to savannah, it isn't too late to
> > do this.
> GNU Health is still in Savannah. Mailing lists, bugs, tasks, news, file
> releases are in place and operational.
> > What needs to be done for this to happen?
> This is the deal... If by tomorrow we have the repositories in GNU, I
> will set the newly created repositories at OSDN as read-only
> Here is the list of repositories:
> This deadline is not capricious. Reverting this decision supposes a big
> effort for me and for the community. Because of the history of the
> project and the relation with GNU, I am willing to give it one more try,
> but we can not halt the project development. At the end of the day, it
> takes two to tango.
> We need the freedom to manage our computing resources at
> It's ironic, but we're failing on the very concept that we want the
> community to follow, the freedom to manage their computing resources.
> For instance, we should, as project administrators, have shell access to
> create and manage the needed resources, or an alternative that won't
> require us having to ask the GNU sysadmins to do it for us. Requesting
> help from sysadmins should be a last resort, in case of emergency. The
> management of our projects should be done by ourselves.
> >
> >    I even asked in the meantime to manually create some additional
> >    repositories, but I never got an answer.
> >
> > Did you remind them?  It might be that they simply missed it.
> How many times? I asked to sysadmin to create the repos, then I was
> re-directed to Savannah hackers, start from zero again, to reach this
> dead-end, where I had no other choice than to host the repositories
> outside
> I feel awkward asking for things over and over again. I don't want to
> bother anyone.
> >
> >    Here is the news:
> >
> >
> > You are using the word ecosystem -- something that lacks any kind of
> > ethical or moral judgment -- to describe GNU Health, it is a word best
> > to avoid in describing free software and GNU projects.  See
> > .
> I strongly disagree, and I kindly ask to please remove this wrong,
> pejorative, and reductionist interpretation of the term ecosystem from
> site. It is completely out of place.
> I often explain the importance of collaboration and cooperation among
> diverse actors, and what I call "collective freedom" as the main
> driving force for evolution in our societies. In this context, GNU
> Health is a digital health ecosystem.
> Ironically, many in the Libre software community are influenced by
> the anthropocentric, selfish and competitive vision of this world. The
> vision of the human being superior to other species and the
> competition-driven, capitalist society have made this planet a trash
> bin, a daily Treblinka to many species and an ever increasing social
> gap and exclusion.
> Best,
> Luis

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]