Ciaran O'Riordan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > This is especially ironic > > given the increasing use of proprietary webapps by FSF projects. > > I don't know which proprietary webapps you're refering to. > > Do you mean "proprietary" as in FSF violating it's own interpretation of > free software or violating your definition (you might call AGPL non-free) of > it? > > Or do you mean that not FSF but the off gnu.org homepages of some GNU > packages are using proprietary webapps (like maybe sourceforge?) ?
I was thinking mainly of the off gnu.org homepages of some GNU software. I think that maybe sourceforge is justifiable, particularly where its use predates the existance of Savannah and other free/open hosting sites, so I wasn't thinking of that, but there are other parts of the GNU project using things like Atlassian Confluence - it's not like we're short of free software WikiEngines. So it wasn't what I was referring to above, but I do feel that AGPL is probably non-free, but it depends how the vague bits are resolved. However, I fear that all AGPL-using sites would be blanket-OK'd by FSF, which is why I think they wouldn't be a good rating agent for webapps. Also, some of the strongest AGPL advocates are heavy users of proprietary web-apps, which is particularly irritating, like a drunk lecturing on how we should all be sober at all times. Hope that explains, -- MJ Ray (slef) Webmaster for hire, statistician and online shop builder for a small worker cooperative http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ (Notice http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html) tel:+44-844-4437-237 _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
