On Sat, 28 Jan 2023 02:01:56 -0500 bill-auger wrote: > around that same time > > IMHO, whether or not it is libre, it is junk -
sry, i hit "send" too soon - this audacious claim was left unqualified around that same time ... (when dotnet first graced our doorsteps), RMS was asking people to audit it - i tried to build it from source, unsuccessfully - thats why BR #1794 was never closed - most likely, it should be removed from parabola; because parabola promises to build everything from source in a clean chroots it is important to note, that there are some significant differences between the FSD and FSDG criteria some privacy concerns (aka: anti-features) are a criteria for the FSDG; but AFAIK those are not a criteria for the FSD - the FSD often presents "anti-feature" warnings for such software; but the FSDG prohibits software with anti-features im not sure whether failing to compiling from source is a criteria for either the the FSD or FSDG, unless that is fundamentally impossible (eg: some sources are not available) - that is the factor which has yet to be determined for dotnet lastly, note that nothing in this or my previous message, relates to licensing - i also suspect that many components of dotnet will carry odious EULA's like 'referenceassemblies'
