Rens Oliemans <[email protected]> writes:

> The FSF approach recommends this:
>
>     "A GNU program should not recommend, promote, or grant legitimacy to the 
> use
>     of any nonfree program. [...] we can and should refuse to advertise them 
> to
>     new potential customers, or to give the public the impression that their
>     existence is legitimate."
>
>     -- https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#References

I feel this isn't intended to be the case for links which represent an
authoritative source for what is relevant.

For example, https://elpa.gnu.org/packages/vertico.html links to
https://github.com/minad/vertico with no alternatives provided and no
disclaimers.

If GNU package infrastructure isn't doing anything special then I don't
see why the packages themselves should be treated any differently.

-- 
Morgan Willcock

Reply via email to