Looks like you have many suggestions to improve our wiki. Please use our forum, just like our wiki is asking you to do, and create a topic for each issue you would like us to address. Discussing these issues in this mailing list would be off-topic and a waste of everyone's time.
To answer your first question, we keep the trail of our communication with FSF here: https://freenix.net/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=7&start=0&; On 4/7/21 1:50 AM, Jean Louis wrote: > Dear Ivan, > > Thank you. I understand "Zaigralin" like one who started playing, > speaking some Slavic languages too. Am I right? > > * Ivan Zaigralin <melik...@melikamp.com> [2021-04-07 02:54]: >> Dear Jean Louis, >> >> We have been waiting for FSF to do something, anything, for years now. >> If you want to "rush", please let them know. > Tell me to which person did you speak to? > > By which communication line did you ask? > >>> What I don't understand is the mentioning of these packages which are >>> non-free: >>> https://freenix.net/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=slackware_14.0 >> These are non-free packages which we've purged from the Slackware >> upstream in order to create Freenix. We are fully committed to >> documenting every step of our work. > Ivan, that what you say here is not described on that page. I would > like to enter proposal on the page, but I cannot see how to subscribe > on Wiki if at all possible. > > Again, you better communicate on the page with something like: "This > is the list of proprietary and FSDG non-conformant packages we > excluded from Slackware". But what you write exactly there is up to > you. I just say, page is not communicating enough. > >>> What is very hard to find on that website is: >>> >>> - Packages, package list or search of packages, as that is starting >>> point to verify if there are some considered non-free or >>> non-compliant to FSF Free Distribution Guidelines >> No, it's not very hard to find. The entire distribution is linked from >> the Free Repository article: >> >> https://freenix.net/fxp/ > Well you say it is not hard to find. Then you offered me hyperlink > which I could not find myself. Please understand it from users' > viewpoint. You know it, and I am not you, I cannot find it. I do know > how to browse websites. What I am speaking of is that at almost every > OS distribution there are list of packages, easy to find, search, > browse. > > Please see here: > https://guix.gnu.org/ > > You can clearly see menu item "Packages", website visitor can at any > time locate it and search for packages. I do not speak of FSDF rather > of habits. OS users do have need to see at list a list of packages > like a single file, that is referenced from pages which user is > visiting. Putting it in a menu item is very good for website and for > distribution. > >> https://freenix.net/fxp/freeslack64-14.2/ > Let me say, it is confusing. Is it Freenix or Freeslack? I do not > know. I do not know what is Freeslack -- learn from this statement, as > your website is Freenix and not Freeslack. To me it is confusing. > > Why would I search for list of packages in Freenix OS inside of a > Freeslack OS? That is viewpoint and my impression at this time. You > maybe equal those, me not, name is different, and there is no visible > proper justification for it, not on the first page. I found it later, > but you should consider harmonizing the name into one, not having two > of them. You can introduce HTTP redirects server-side to move to new > name. > > In this URL I find only 20 packages listed: > https://freenix.net/fxp/freeslack64-14.2/PACKAGES.TXT > > ⇛ So do you see now that I cannot find full list of packages? > > Let me say that making a search for a package is very easy, I did it > years ago with simple grep and awk. > > You can serialize information about one package into one single line, > just replace \n with space and remove redundant words such as "or" > "and" "the" "a" or similar. This allows for grep-ing the package. Once > greped, awk can extract the name of the package from specific field or > maybe URL as other field and construct HTML listing. > > Or if packages have their URLs you can just run it through Markdown > and make single HTML that is searchable by using browser functions. Or > Pandoc, and construct Wiki pages. > >>> - Issues -- I have seen it, but I missed it, it is very hard to find >>> issues. That is one of requirements. >> In Participation article of the wiki, there are clear instructions for >> reporting issues. > That does not make it easy. Do you see that me, who took effort to > tell you about this, told you my experience, I came to site, I could > not find issues though I did see it on some page hyperlinked, but I > removed the page and could not find it any more. I hope you will > understand this as a serious impairment of the website. This is > positive critics for you to implement something. > > I am asking myself, why people provide Search option on websites that > do not yield with result: > https://freenix.net/dokuwiki/doku.php?do=search&id=free_repository&q=issues > > It is not just your problem. Again, if I wish to index all my website, > I would just convert it to single lines per page and use simple > functions to extract URLs and pages. Old method that worked before > 25-30 years. Today people are complicating and do not get result. > > In this example, I could not find "Issues" page. > >> Please let us know if you have any ideas for improving our >> communication via the wiki, the forum, or anything else, but please >> understand that there's absolutely nothing we can do to move the >> certification process forward at this time. Several years ago FSF >> told us to stand by while they are rendering their final decision, >> and they've done absolutely nothing since then, as far as we can >> tell, despite my occasional efforts to check in. > To me it looks like communication problem. First you should say to > which person did you communicate? > > In regards to improvements, why call it expansion pack if it is not? > Or if it is not distribution in itself, make it clear. It is > confusing. > > Still I do not find it right that you have the link here: > https://freenix.net/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=start#slackware_package_licensing > > What does it mean "Slackware package licensing"? To me, first > impression is that you are licensing something. > > Then second impression is that you talk about some packages that are > for commercial use only, thus non-free. And I run away. > > Think about how you are communicating. > > If you wish to say what is non-free clearly designate labels and say > what Slackware non-free packages have been excluded and why, you miss > only clearly designated labels. > > I still don't understand is it fully integrated OS in itself, or I > need to use Slackware together? > > Do you see here the breadcrumbs: > https://freenix.net/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=free_repository > > Trace: • participation • licensing • slackware_14.1 • slackware_14.2 • > slackware_14.0 • start • free_repository > > I may think this is some kind of licensing related to your website, > there is no clear designation what you mean with it. > > Don't write text by expecting people to know already 90% of the > subject, write it so, by thinking that person by reading one single > page should be able to understand all relevant information without > looking up other pages or third party pages. > > I think "Report issue" should be in the menu. > > Your link to report issue only points to forum. But forum does not > speak where to report which issue, it is not clear. > > Compare it with other distributions, they receive reports, and you do > not receive reports. Find out why? Maybe it is not accessible website, > not appealing, not easy to find out. > > Sometimes I make a HTML page and I just want that one page to stand > out without anything else, that is alright as purpose is not to browse > the page or look for some subjects. On Freenix website purpose should > be to hyperlink or relevant pages, especially those very much needed > and wanted: > > - Main page > - Download > - Installation > - Documentation > - Package list > - Reporting issues > - Users' forum > - Donations > - Contacts > > What do you think about it? > > Jean > > Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns: > https://www.fsf.org/campaigns > > Sign an open letter in support of Richard M. Stallman > https://rms-support-letter.github.io/ > > >
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
