Excellent work Ivan, thank you for pushing forward free system distribution!
Jean * Ivan Zaigralin <melik...@melikamp.com> [2019-06-21 22:10]: > On Friday, June 21, 2019 18:46:17 Ineiev wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 06:00:32PM -0400, bill-auger wrote: > > > i dont remember exactly, but it appears to be in response to > > > someones concern that the freenix documentation is incomplete, > > > which is not a problem on its own; but that, more importantly, it > > > directs users to the slackware documentation to provide its > > > missing information > > > > Quite right, > > https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2018-07/msg00016.html > > says, > > > > > It makes zero sense to duplicate the documentation, since our > > > project is dead set on keeping the technical details identical > > > to Slackware as much as possible, allowing us not to fork > > > support. > > > > I believe this results in a doubt that should be resolved: > > if Freenix doesn't "fork support", does it mean that it > > effectively directs its users to Slackware? > > Before I address these concerns, please let me share with you my emotional > state. I am getting rather frustrated with this conversation, although I am > definitely not blaming anyone in particular for that, except for possibly > myself. The thing is, Freenix has committed to compliance with FSDG prior to > 2017. We have received a number of relevant bug reports since then, and we > took care of each and every one of them. To mention just some, we changed the > project name and removed offending packages, like some fonts and some Mozilla > products. > > Bill says rather explicitly, he has no bugs to report, he's just musing. FSF > has not told us the official FSF position concerning these hypothetical > scenarios either. Our entire documentation at freenix.net can be skimmed in > minutes; if there's an FSDG-related bug there, having to do with either the > links or the quantity of documentation, it hasn't been reported in years. Do > you perhaps see now where we are coming from? We are not aware of anything > afoul of FSDG within our project as of right now, and one of our primary > goals > is to take freedom bug reports with full seriousness. We are at a loss as to > what else we need to do at this point of the FSF approval process in order to > move it along, so some clarification would be very welcome. > > Now, to address the issues raised in Bill's original post: > https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2018-07/msg00023.html > > To the best of my understanding, the issues there have to do with > documentation and/or linking to Slackware documentation. The entirety > of > Freenix documentation is currently in one place: freenix.net. There's wiki > there, a forum, and the source code for the deployment script. If > quality/quantity of documentation is a concern for this certification > process, > it's there for anyone to see and judge. > > There are a few Web links, as of now, from our wiki to Slackware-related > resources. None of them are with the intent to provide documentation to > Freenix end users. They are all credit and/or reference links, practically > unavoidable simply because we believe it is our duty to explain to our users > and the potential contributors just what we do to the upstream Slackware > distribution to make it into a freedom-respecting product. > > Once again, please let us know if there's anything there you see that is in > violation of FSDG.
