On Friday, June 26, 2020 11:39 PM, bill-auger <bill-auger@peers.community> wrote:
> the javascript is really not the issue in this case - the "app > stores" themselves conflict directly with the FSDG; because > those websites offer downloads of non-free programs - also, if > the only purpose of those URLs, is to suggest to the user to > install some phone "app", then that suggestion itself would > conflict directly with the FSDG; because that would be condoning > the use of a non-free OS, merely because there are no free OS > for 99% of those phones - IMHO, even f-droid should not be > suggested formally, despite that it hosts only free software, > and probably is acceptable by the FSDG; because its mere > existence suggests the use of a non-free OS, and hopelessly > non-libre hardware How come nonfree JS is not the issue? It's one of the issues that's enough to disqualify these websites. Other issues you mentioned are valid too. Iceweasel doesn't come with any functionality to block nonfree JS out of the box (LibreJS, NoScript, etc.). So I think it shouldn't contain any links to websites that serve nonfree JS. _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list Dev@lists.parabola.nu https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev
