On 2024-01-07 13:31, Richard Stallman wrote:
[...]> Suggestions on how to improve librejs to make site administrators life> easier to comply are welcome :) All else being equal, we would like to make it easier -- but not by eviscerating the checking it is supposed to do.
In CodeBerg's case, I still think it could take years for it to be libreJS compliant. I expect upstream Gitea completely to ignore the libreJS issue, because not only that stale ticket [1] was opened in 2020, Gitea was taken over by a company and gone very commercial in 2022. IMHO Gitea cannot be trusted to free our software, so that's why we have Forgejo->Codeberg.
The dropdown list of many licences with some nonfree, and the problematic "choose license" link, together with libreJS issue have bothered me. For my self-hosted forgejo instance, I'm considering a fork, to patch all of these, to insert correct licensing info into all js files, but it could take months, and I will have to learn Go language and deb packaging. Then if I submit my patch to Codeberg, they may accept it, so the whole process could take a year or so. What does it mean for your repo evaluation? Or, do you make exception for Codeberg for C0.0 and B0? Or, do you consider changing C0.0?
Thu, 4 Jan 2024 18:51:17 +0900 (JST) From: Jing Luo <jing@jing.rocks> ====[...] changing the criteria C0.0 to something like "the javascript should be free but it doesn't have to be librejs compliant"?
==== [1] https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/13393 -- Jing Luo About me: https://jing.rocks/about/ PGP Fingerprint: 4E09 8D19 00AA 3F72 1899 2614 09B3 316E 13A1 1EFC
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
