Re: (Really) Free Software future
Hi, isn't that what basically every Developer does? If I write a program and it's elisp there is only as far as I know one interpreter and all libs I use are also not replacable without rewriting code. So is all my programmes I ever wrote also not Free software because it's not based on some very primitive Kernel Systemcalls (that have to be then not even linux specific right? Then 99% of GPL software out there would not really be free software. So that A only runs with B seems no good Definition you would have to provide some other definition that makes Gnome here a special case. I assume you would bring up that a DE is some sort of base level software that is no application layer software in itself but part of a Operation System, like the UI in Windows is also considered part of the OS? I could see that argument if Gnome would be the only grafical environment for Linux in existence, and even then I wonder what's the problem with rewriting it to run without systemd? It's like saying a software that has not my wished Feature A / B / C is not free software. But we don't meassure freedom in how much and which features a software has. Sorry to interject that discussion but maybe that is helpful? writes: > But that is achieved with forks of systemd tools and messing with the source > code. > How does that make GNOME independent from Systemd? > > Fannys > > Oct 14, 2019, 20:59 by jgibbons2...@gmail.com: > > On Mon, 2019-10-14 at 21:32 +0300, Alexander Vdolainen wrote: > > Hi, > > On 10/14/19 9:16 PM, Paul Smith wrote: > > On Mon, 2019-10-14 at 18:52 +0200, Svante Signell wrote: > > > On Mon, 2019-10-14 at 12:13 -0400, Paul Smith wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2019-10-14 at 12:07 +0200, Svante Signell wrote: > > (skipped) > > > For example, no aspect of either GNOME or systemd are proprietary, > > using the common meaning of the term. Also, "lock-in" usually refers > > to software that prevents users from switching to an alternative; GNOME > > and systemd are certainly not lock-in. > > I'm afraid but I cannot agree with that. Actually with systemd design > you have 'lock-in', because in some cases you need to modify a source > code to support systemd (or you will face something like this - > > https://superuser.com/questions/1372963/how-do-i-keep-systemd-from-killing-my-tmux-sessions). > Also, a lot of system daemons has eaten by systemd (and to make it works > some forks were created like eudev). > Finally, correct me if I wrong, but GNOME 3.8 and newer requires systemd > to run, it's a lock-in isn't it ? > > I'm assuming by GNOME you mean gnome-shell. Please let me know if I'm > incorrect. > > Guix has packaged gnome-shell 3.30.2 but has not packaged systemd. > If systemd was a requirement for gnome-shell guix would have had to package > systemd in order for gnome-shell to compile and/or work, by definition of > requirement. > gnome-shell builds and works just fine in guix. > It follows that systemd is not a prerequisite for gnome-shell 3.30.2. > > Please consider this a friendly correction :)
Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project
Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hi Jean-Louis, > > Jean Louis skribis: > >> * Ricardo Wurmus [2019-10-10 07:09]: >>> I have previously asked you privately to stop spamming our mailing >>> lists. I am asking you a second time publicly. If you keep disrupting >>> our mailing lists your posts will be moderated. >> >> I cannot expect anything else from you. > > You’ve made your point now; I see you’ve even set up a web page to > collect hatred messages against me. > > I ask you to stop using the Guix mailing lists for this now. I will > propose to the Guix maintainers to put you on a moderation queue if you > don’t stop by yourself. > > Disagreement is fine; attrition is now. > > My sincere apologies to all the Guix people who are witnessing this. :-( > > Thanks, > Ludo’. And why are you not on moderation for posting horrible things against Richard Stallman on a gnu website where he is the leader of the Gnu Project? Yes the other guy maybe spams here a bit the malinig list, but the website read much more people than the mailing list, so you spammed the internet much more. It's also not about disagreement, he made clearly the point that he is fine with your opinion about RMS, he is just not ok with you posting it on a domain that you don't process. And imply that this is the opinion of the guix project while there was never a vote on this here. Is Guix a political Project now? If not why did you post political statements on that website? So you hurt that project with that move obviously, how do you justify that?
Re: Proposal to remove the off-topic, not free software related thoughtcrime accusations from the Guix project pages on GNU.ORG websitew
> Wow! Ease off a bit! > > You might not noticed that, but today Guix is the most vivid part of > GNU. And I could not image an action, that might cause more damage to > GNU project, than urging Guix lead developers to leave. Even if you > believe that forking software over political discord is good thing to > do (despite it does not align well with the rest of your message), by > all means, you would not able to outcompete them, so it would simply > ended in Guix out of GNU. So it even more harmful than urging RMS to > leave. After all, RMS is mortal and, alas, will leave us and GNU > sooner or later, while Guix is not necessary. I am a Lisp developer mostly Elisp and a Nixos User and have on one Machine Guix system installed, I believe in Free Software yet I don't get how on the Guix Website a Article against RMS could be posted and despite some issues with Nixos partly because of technical reasons but more so of ideological reasons feel not welcome in the Guix community to phrase it mildly. That some devs in a team have different oppinions is one thing but that they post it on the guix.gnu.org website really puts me off completely. When that stands on that website, everybody implicitly that works for that project also stands for that if they want to or not. That are my opinions I at least have not written a bug report or feature request here because of that incident and likely more feedback including some code that could have come in the future from me stands in question. So surely seperately fork one small linux distro over that is maybe not very clever, but maybe the FSF should be forked and then yes maybe it's nessesary to have more forks of projects, when the differences become to big. Many similar projects exist because 1 uses GPL and one uses BSD, so if peopl want a GPL + SJW Edition implicit or explicit in some cases: https://www.zdnet.com/article/you-cant-open-source-license-morality/ I also don't trust people that can't logically think or cite people correctly and attack people on strawman arguments on writing good code. But I don't know your internal processes inside GNU, but I can only say that for (at least some) outsiders like me it all looks like a big red flag. My 2 cents.
