And, while we're on the topic, I'd like to remind everyone that it's been more than 3 years since LibertyBSD was released.
On Fri, 19 Jan 2018 12:45:47 -0800 Ivan Zaigralin <[email protected]> wrote: > I think this is a very good idea. I have to confess, we are not feeling very > confident while FreeSlack is stalling in the review queue. > > In our case, we've been informed that "FreeSlack" is afoul of FSDG because > it's too similar to "Slackware". We pitched "Freenix" and "FXP" as > replacement > distribution names in April 2017, and haven't heard a word since. This puts > us > in an interesting position: when our users ask us, so what are you guys > called > again?, all we can say is: not FreeSlack. > > We also receive regular suggestions/requests to get the FSF certification. > And > of course we do tell our users what exactly is going on, the way we see it > from our side, but wouldn't it be like 100 times more easy and reassuring for > the users to read FSF's own Changelog of the review process? If users rely on > FSF certification to pick distributions, they won't be quick to blindly trust > the claims of progress made by projects still under initial review. > > On Friday, January 19, 2018 14:51:02 Robert Call wrote: > > If the problem is time and resources, could the FSF maybe start a page > > on https://libreplanet.org that would show : the distros that have > > asked the FSF to be reviewed, which ones have started the public review > > process and document the issues have been found? It would offer a bit > > more transparency and everyone would be on the same page as to where in > > the review process the distros are. > > > > Maybe the endorsed distro review process could be handled in similar > > way that the FSF directory is maintained and the FSF could teach people > > where to look for non-free things in these distros. The goal would be > > to get more people actively involved in the review process. > > > > Hopefully these (or other) solutions could pave a way forward. Even > > with a lack of time and resources, I don't think it is acceptable to > > not respond to distro maintainers that had already started the review > > process, just a "we are still looking into it" or "there is still an > > issue with x" would be sufficient.
