On 14-06-2018 11:51, Paul Boddie wrote:
Of course. There is a need to define the scope of such a proposal, and here
you give an example of how some initiatives have chosen to do so:
Oh, and what about firmware? I personally shall be damned because I
download binary blobs to my hardware's RAM (instead of having it in
flash memory).
Then again, I did mention that one might confine the scope to the tools used
to provide the FSFE's campaigning and collaboration platform, which would rule
out the office phones in Berlin (or wherever).
I think Daniel's proposal makes sense and could be a good and
constructive approach if the scope is defined properly, as Max pointed
about.
I would think of it like this:
The FSFE is an organization that works for software freedom and for the
adoption of free software on all levels.
As such, the organization wishes (and no-one doubts this) to use free
software on all levels in its operations, i.e. for administrative tasks,
communication, collaboration, accounts.
I'd limit the scope as such:
* We're talking of the software used by *the association* as part of its
*operations*, i.e. not about the personal choices of employees or
volunteers in their spare time.
* We're talking about software used by the organization in its *own*
operations - not that of vendors and other third parties (e.g.,
designers and accountants - if the designer prefers to use Gimp for
images that's fine, but they *are* a third party)
* We're talking about *tools*, i.e. mostly userspace software. We should
include proprietary JavaScript - so using Twitter or Google is not
"using proprietary software" because the service is proprietary, but
because they use non-free JavaScript (I mention this to align with the
FSF's position). Anything proprietary installed on staff computers for
work purposes would be listed, e.g. Skype, if someone were using that
(which I have reasons to believe is not the case)
* We're not talking about firmware.
AND, we're not talking "hall of shame", we're talking transparency and
documentation. We, as a free software organization, would like to use
only free software in our operations, but are currently unable to do so
100% because of these gaps.
I think such a thing makes eminent sense.
Incidentally, does anyone know what the FSF's position on their own
possible use of non-free software is?
Regards
Carsten
But did no-one see any merit in the idea? Maybe one of the many
other, non-Fellow/member/supporter Assembly members might share
their thoughts with us.
I am a member, and I think Max well explained the reasoning. But I see
one more: we do not need to publish a "hall of shame". It would
mostly help internal frictions, or attacks by anybody who wants to
paint himself as holier than us ("himself": women are usually more
intelligent than that).
I didn't ask for a "hall of shame" and I don't recall Daniel asking for one,
either. The merit I see in such a proposal is that it shows people how various
kinds of activities can be performed using Free Software. Personally, I don't
see that as a big demand for a Free Software advocacy organisation, even if we
might discuss whether the demand is formulated in the right way.
But did no-one see any merit in the idea?
Daniel Pocock I suppose. So much as to claim he will post the same
motion again without further arguments. I can't avoid thinking
he wants to lose the vote again in order to complain again on his blog
and increase his own halo. I'd love to be proved wrong.
I get the impression that we are possibly encountering some other
interpersonal issues here.
Paul
_______________________________________________
Discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All
participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other:
https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
_______________________________________________
Discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All
participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other:
https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
