I also support putting a banner on Planet GNOME. Meg
On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 9:00 PM, Magdalen Berns <m.be...@thismagpie.com> wrote: > Oh dear. > > On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:39 AM, Fabiano Fidêncio <fabi...@fidencio.org> > wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 2:24 AM, Alexandre Franke >> <alexandre.fra...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:59 AM, Fabiano Fidêncio <fabi...@fidencio.org> >> wrote: >> >>> Can you be more explicit about what you mean with "tools used to do >> >>> your/the bank transactions run nonfree software" >> >> >> >> AFAIU, when you do a bank transfer, the job responsible for your >> >> transaction will be executed in the next scheduled period. >> >> There are people monitoring and scheduling it (most likely not using >> >> free software for this), there is a system on where it is being >> >> running (same here ...). >> > >> > According to the GNU/FSF advocacy, in the case of a service it is ok >> > not to have access to the source code since you're not the one running >> > the software. >> https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/network-services-arent-free-or-nonfree.fr.html >> >> Thanks for the link. >> > > You also run the non-free software when you use online banking, ebay, > paypal, amazon, google and pretty much everything that most of us regularly > use... > > Are we considering not linking to this fundraiser because it is hosted on > a website that uses non-free software? I hate to break it to you all, but > it's entirely likely that GNOME servers have already linked to a website > that uses non-free software before, probably like a lot of times... A quick > site search seems to agree with my hypothesis. > > In my view, there are more effective ways to demonstrate that we care > about free software than this and in any case, it seems a bit hypocritical > of us to get all shirty about a single link to promote the fundraiser of > the development project of GNOME builder, with all things considered. > > >> And I'm really wondering how much these random comments about "not >> >> good, not free software" coming from and with no real suggestions can >> >> help instead of just generate noise and silly discussions like this >> >> one. >> > >> > You're mislead about the intentions of people caring about software >> > freedom. Your stance is that they should not be so focused on their >> > cause, but maybe you should be a bit more open as well and consider >> > their points and reasoning rather than just outright claiming it is >> > noise. >> > > Many of us were already aware his fundraiser would be hosted on indiGoGo > before it was published including you (Alexandre). Nobody from GNOME seemed > to object to indiGoGo as a fundraiser platform when the idea was being > thrashed out and nobody objecting here has suggested any alternative or > offered to help support Christian in setting something up either. Fabiano > makes a very valid point about that. If there are people among us who > really want to make it a policy not to do this sort of thing then that > seems like a valid discussion to have for the future but I really don't see > why this issue should affect the community's willingness to promote builder > fundraiser on the GNOME server when is already well in motion and there's > no alternative solution to the problem we seek to solve for builder. On > that basis I have to agree with Fabiano, that the objections against this > are not being argued in a constructive way. > > Here we are discussing the project lead by Christian who has already > invested so much of his time, energy and effort into putting it all > together, hacking away. He has placed a lot of trust and good faith into > the community who have given him positive feedback to nurture the > investment. The project is for a GNOME specific development tool which we > are all likely to benefit from. If we don't choose to support it, who else > is going to do that? > > Personally I feel that for us to collectively refuse to help with the > builder fundraiser this late in the day would be an utterly disrespectful > way to undervalue the time, energy and hard work contributed by the Builder > team's contributors who are working on something that is specifically > designed with the GNOME community in mind. > > Ultimately, the take home point I want to make is that we don't have a > policy on linking to non-free software. Maybe we should but right now: we > don't. On that basis, we should get behind members of our community at the > times when it most matters to them, which is for builder is right now. > > Yeah, I've checked a proper dictionary before, that's the reason I've >> asked you what did you mean, because it was still not clear to me. >> > > I can't be sure but I believe he meant the point was "moot" because he > felt he'd proved himself right on the issue already, in an earlier > paragraph. > > Happy 2015, > > Magdalen > > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > >
_______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
