Charles Choi <[email protected]> writes: > I did see your reply but was also surprised by your editorial request. I > assert that Scrim (GPLv3 license) and Captee (Apache license) are libre > software where the source is available for both applications, but not gratis > in that I have chosen to sell them through the Apple App Store. Given that > the FSF has taken considerable energy in making the distinction between libre > and gratis software, I would think that Org would also recognize this > distinction.
Sorry, I did not expect my request to be viewed this way. Of course, I have nothing against selling the free software. My problem with the linked pages is different. Let me explain my impression when I read the links: 1. http://yummymelon.com/scrim/ When I open the page I see description of Scrim, link to app store, and Support ∙ Privacy ∙ Source links at the bottom of the page. The page does not say anything about license, and the footer *looks* like a generic blog footer not relevant to the app itself. Of course, after clicking on the links there, it turns out to be relevant. Opening the app store page, no license is mentioned. Only in the "source code" link, there is github page with GPLv3 being mentioned. This is fine, but I felt that it is not very obvious to readers that the software is in fact free software, and not the usual proprietary app store app. 2. http://yummymelon.com/captee/ Here, the page follows similar pattern, except github is mentioned instead of generic "source code". I expect that a mention of github in the page text can be a bit more intuitive for people, but still a somewhat cryptic given that the link is to discussion page specifically. > As I have editorial control over how I wish to present my software, I > respectfully decline your request to change their presentation on my websites. > That said, you as maintainer have editorial control over the Org website. If > it is a requirement that 3rd party tools listed in > https://orgmode.org/tools.html be both libre and gratis, then that is your > prerogative and we can close this conversation. But I would suggest that this > page be less ideological and provide recognition of all tools that work with > Org. I admit that the suggested wording may not be best if you want to encourage people buying the software. I can see how you may want the links to source code to be less visible compared to app store. At the same time, I wish it was still a bit less confusing for people specifically looking to find whether Captee and Scrim are free software. Would you consider mentioning the license more directly on both pages? Again, I do not insist - as you correctly pointed, I can put that info on Org website directly. However, given your reaction to my previous suggested wording, I'd rather make sure that you do not have objections to how the fact the Captee and Scrim are free software are presented. If you do not want to modify your pages, maybe you can suggest a wording to put on the tools page that is acceptable for you? -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode maintainer, Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>. Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>, or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>
