On 26.08.2016 05:16, Christopher Waid wrote: > On 2016-08-25 06:26 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote: >> On 25.08.2016 15:47, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote: >>> On 25.08.2016 15:25, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote: >>>> This issue of "you said it is 'libre' but I prove it's not", and even >>>> the issue regarding the older publication on ThinkPenguin's site, >>>> can be >>>> easily solved by changing terms/words accordingly there. There's no >>>> need >>>> to make everyone mad at each other. >>> >>> It's not just about terminology. It's about deliberately misinforming >>> the people to back your project because it's been libre hardware and >>> libre software "right from the beginning". And also misinforming people >>> to think it's OK for their freedom to buy laptops with proprietary BIOS >>> rather than with Libreboot. >> >> Richard Stallman has just confirmed me that FSF has not received the PCB >> design sources along with the Libre Tea Computer Card. >> >> I hope that now everyone understands that this EOMA68 board is *not* >> libre hardware as claimed. > > That doesn't make it "*not* libre hardware" as far as the FSF is > concerned. The FSF *DOES NOT* require the PCB designs for RYF.
RYF doesn't certify free hardware design. But "libre hardware" means free-design hardware and that is explained in this essay you should read sometimes: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-hardware-designs.html Using the definition there, of course EOMA68 computer is *not* "libre hardware".