FSF guidelines discourage referencing non-free software: https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/References.html#References
I see some problems with this, and think it'd be better if the standards addressed these questions head-on. To me, this prohibition looks like simple protectionism. It's one thing to promote free software by creating a free program superior to a non-free one, pointing users to both, explaining the advantages of the free program (including the freedom part), and then letting the users decide. It's quite another thing to simply hide the non-free program from users. I have seen software authors who are confident in their work point to competing software right from their websites; for me as a user, this promotes confidence in the author's own work. Is the assumption here that users are unable to see their own best interests, even when presented with all the arguments? If yes, that seems disrespectful and paternalistic towards users. If no, why not point users to both free and non-free alternatives and trust them to decide? _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
