"Lefty (石鏡 )" <[email protected]> writes: > a statement which represents the Foundation (which is, as Stormy has > pointed out, no more than its members)
This doesn't mean that the Foundation speaks for each of its members. The Foundation speaks for itself and GNOME. GNOME has a policy (written or not) that prohibits importing non-free software into its repositories. How can users and potential contributors be informed of this policy? One way (not the only way, but maybe the best way) is by GNOME's self identification as a "free software" project. "Open source" doesn't imply any reason or policy for rejecting proprietary software, so "free and open source" is a less clear statement about what GNOME is. This doesn't imply that all the members personally have the philosophy of refusing to contribute to any non-free project. It just means that GNOME is a project that doesn't develop non-free software (if the current description doesn't communicate that clearly enough, it could be made more explicit). In practice, we can clearly see (by the survey and other means) that no change is needed in GNOME's description in order to attract contributors who have other philosophies. A quick comment on the survey. I think the main flaw is that it tests for word-for-word agreement with one person (RMS). I have views very similar to Richard, but "Illegitimate" is a word I wouldn't use, and I'd usually avoid "immoral". That's not philosophical disagreement, it's just different ways of expressing ideas. When you focus on words, you'll massively magnify differences, but they can't be read as implying disagreement. If you focus on philosophies, that could be different. And to do that right, the focus should be on general agreement rather than idea-for-idea exact agreement. I'd need time to formulate it sufficiently clearly, but consider this question: Do you use exclusively free software *or* wish that all the software you used could be freely modified and maintained by the user community? This wouldn't tell is if everyone agrees with RMS or not, but that shouldn't be the goal anyway. The results of this question would probably support the suggestion that GNOME strengthen it's description of it's goals of giving/protecting freedom. -- Ciarán O'Riordan, +32 487 64 17 54, http://ciaran.compsoc.com Please help build the software patents wiki: http://en.swpat.org http://www.EndSoftwarePatents.org Donate: http://endsoftwarepatents.org/donate List: http://campaigns.fsf.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/esp-action-alert _______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
