Le mardi 16 août 2016 à 20:34 +0200, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) a écrit : > (“Respects your freedom” would be equally fuzzy if it were not certified > according to clear criteria.)
On that, I disagree. Freedom in technology has a very precise definition, and respecting that definition is very binary and straightforward. I don't see what's fuzzy about it. The FSF's RYF certification is instead adding layers of compromises (and also mixing a bunch of other aspects in the bag). So I certainly wouldn't mix "respects your freedom" and "the FSF's respect your freedom certification". -- Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices Website: https://www.paulk.fr/ Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/ Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev
