Re: [GNU-linux-libre] [gnu.org #1262331] (inactive Linux distributions)

[Julie Marchant]

On 2018年01月17日 16:32, Jason Self wrote:
> That's already a thing: One of the criteria in the GNU FSDG is that "to 
> be listed, a distribution should be actively maintained." When this has 
> come up in the past, the determination of being actively maintained was 
> said to rest with the distro maintainers and if *they* consider it to be 
> maintained or not (as opposed to, say, moving slowly.)

I think it would be a good idea for a well-defined standard to be
defined regarding whether a distro is current and maintained or not. I
agree that distros that don't get updated often shouldn't be excluded
from consideration, but something should be in place to ensure that the
distro's developer(s) is (are) still involved in the project. I think
security and compatibility implications should be considered, too; after
all, kernels stop working with new hardware and security vulnerabilities
happen. It wouldn't be very nice for someone to use BLAG based on the
FSF's recommendation, only to have their credit card information stolen
because of some old security vulnerability, or something.

I'd like to suggest the following rules as a rough draft:

1. The distro's maintainers should annually do one of the following: (a)
publish a new release; (b) publish a post summarizing work done on the
distro in the prior year which directly impacts the distros users (for
example, such a post could note important packages which have been
updated in the current release and what these updates mean to the
users); (c) write to the FSF to explain why no updates have been
necessary in the respective year (and, in particular, why the security
and hardware compatibility implications of this are unimportant).

2. The distro should ensure one of the following: (a) that all known
security vulnerabilities are fixed for users of the current release of
the distro in a reasonable timeframe; (b) that new, non-technical users
of the distro can see that it has or may have security vulnerabilities,
e.g. via a warning on the distro's website that security updates are not
always delivered.

3. The distro should either: (a) be reasonably expected to be compatible
with computers that can currently be bought from mainstream retailers;
(b) indicate on its website what hardware it is compatible with.

So, let's go through some of the distros and how they would be affected
by these rules:

* Trisquel, gNewSense, Dragora, GuixSD, PureOS, Parabola, and LibreCMC
would be mostly unaffected. Those that release less often than once a
year (e.g. Trisquel) would simply have to make annual posts summarizing
package updates to the current release. They don't need to talk about
all of it, just what the maintainers feel is significant. They can even
just make a quick, non-exhaustive list of packages that have been
updated if they want.

* BLAG would either have to get moving or fail the test. There haven't
been any updates to the "current" release for users, BLAG 140k, in
years, and the system is do doubt susceptible to multiple known security
vulnerabilities. It would likely end up removed.

* Dynebolic and Musix: the respective distro's maintainer would likely
send an email to the FSF every year noting that the lack of updates is
intentional and add a notice to the download page that it is not a
secure distro and should not be used to send sensitive information over
the Internet. It's meant for media editing and secondarily local jobs
like partitioning, so this would be easily justified. Alternatively, if
the maintainer has lost interest in maintaining the distro, it would end
up removed.

-- 
Julie Marchant
https://onpon4.github.io

Protect your emails with GnuPG:
https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [GNU-linux-libre] [gnu.org #1262331] (inactive Linux distributions)

[Adonay Felipe Nogueira]

I recall seeing a Trisquel forum post about some BLAG 20 Alpha
Kickstart files ([1]), it seems that forum post has the attachment which
has the files inside.

It's somewhat different/unusual for a distro to rely on the forum of
another to post its own files (:S) ... But let's consider that as OK for
now, perhaps one can still make use of the files.

[1] .

2018-01-17T16:46:30-0500 bill-auger wrote:
> where is this ticket that you reference? gnu.org #1262331 - it is not on
> the CC list - is that a on public tracker?
>
> i asked this question myself when i did a review of the FSDG distros
> list last summer[1] noting that proteanos appears to be inactive as well
> - still today there has been no response on either of the blag or
> proteanos mailing lists[2][3] - six months with no response to a simple
> question like "is this project still active?" should indicate a negative
> answer
>
> my opinion however, is that there is no reason to remove a distro from
> the list only for being unmaintained - if it works: it works - and
> always will - but the case with blag is something different - blag
> actually has no software available - the download links on their website
> have not worked in a very long time because (as ive heard) the files
> were lost - "blag" exists in reality only in the form of it's website -
> so there literally is no blag distribution by nature of the fact that
> there is nothing being distributed - so i still suggest that blag be
> removed (or perhaps moved to a new "honerable mentions" section) - but
> if proteanos is still available and viable software then there is no
> reason to remove it merely because it is un-supported
>
>
> there is an evaluation process for adding new distros - uruk has
> requested consideration about a year ago and it fell short of FSDG
> standards at that time; but they are improving it and the discussion is
> still open[4]
>
>
> it was this comment that prompted me to respond - as mentioned above, i
> looked into the current status of all of the FSDG distro last summer and
> i can not concour with Le Dim's evaluation
>
> dragora has been very active in recent months working on the next
> release - far from being inactive, if all FSDG distros were ranked today
> according to development activity, i would place dragora in second place
> closely behind parabola with trisquel a more distant third - of course,
> to put into persoective, parabola, being a rolling release distro
> requires a far greater amount of routine maintenance just to remain sane
> where the other FSDG distros are LTS and designed to require only
> high-priority stability/security upgrades - that is only to say that
> some distros require more or less maintenance than others
>
> the developer of dynebolic is still as active as ever in the dyne
> project and is planning for the next release of dynebolic to be based on
> devuan once the devuan-sdk is completed
>
> the musix developer is also still in contact with it's community and is
> planning the next release[5]
>
> the important thing to note is that regardless of whatever development
> activity is immediately apparent, the current releases of dragora,
> dynebolic, and musix are still available and viable, functioning
> perfectly as intended; and their developers are still in communication
> with the community - this is an especially important factor to consider
> in regards to "Live" distros such as dynebolic and musix which are
> static by design (i.e. they are intended to be run directly from the
> read-only medium and never installed nor upgraded) - the fact that the
> operating system is guaranteed never to change a bit from one boot to
> the next is among the most desirable features of these distros - they
> are not the typical sort of distro that require any intermediate
> maintenance nor is that even possible; so such a distro can not
> reasonably be said to be "inactive"; because they are designed to be
> fixed in form ("carved in stone" if you will) - the project itself could
> be be deemed dormant or inactive; as in: "we can probably not expect
> version N+1"; but that says nothing of the efficacy of any current
> available versions
>
>
> [1]:
> https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2017-08/msg0.html
> [2]: https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/blag-whereto/2017-July/thread.html
> [3]: http://lists.proteanos.com/proteanos-dev/2017/08/
> [4]:
> https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2017-12/msg3.html
> [5]: https://musixdistro.wordpress.com/

-- 
- https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
- Palestrante e consultor sobre /software/ livre (não confundir com
  gratis).
- "WhatsApp"? Ele não é livre. Por favor, veja formas de se comunicar
  instantaneamente comigo no endereço abaixo.
- Contato: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno#vCard
- Arquivos comuns aceitos (apenas sem DRM): Corel Draw, Microsoft
  Office, MP3, MP4, WMA, 

Re: [GNU-linux-libre] [gnu.org #1262331] (inactive Linux distributions)

[bill-auger]

On 01/17/2018 06:42 PM, Jason Self wrote:
> They wouldn't. I imagine that the webmasters will handle the replying of 
> email that's sent to them? Maybe this was sent as food for thought or 
> something?
> 

hm - i would have expected fewer question marks in that response
considering the number of times i have seen printed on the GNU website
that you are the "chief" GNU webmaster - is that a position you have
resigned or more of a honorary title?

in any case, as long as The Great and Wise ol' Gnu chews on my ideas, i
am happy to feed him :)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [GNU-linux-libre] [gnu.org #1262331] (inactive Linux distributions)

[Jason Self]

bill-auger  wrote ..
> then the obvious question would be if the OP will see these replies if
> they are not subscribed to this mailing list

They wouldn't. I imagine that the webmasters will handle the replying of 
email that's sent to them? Maybe this was sent as food for thought or 
something?

Re: [GNU-linux-libre] [gnu.org #1262331] (inactive Linux distributions)

[bill-auger]

On 01/17/2018 05:30 PM, Jason Self wrote:
> It's a ticketing system used to handle certain email addresses like 
> webmast...@gnu.org (and more), which seems to be where the person 
> originally wrote to.
> 

then the obvious question would be if the OP will see these replies if
they are not subscribed to this mailing list



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [GNU-linux-libre] [gnu.org #1262331] (inactive Linux distributions)

[Jason Self]

bill-auger  wrote ..
> where is this ticket that you reference? gnu.org #1262331 - it is not 
> on the CC list - is that a on public tracker?

It's a ticketing system used to handle certain email addresses like 
webmast...@gnu.org (and more), which seems to be where the person 
originally wrote to.

Re: [GNU-linux-libre] [gnu.org #1262331] (inactive Linux distributions)

[bill-auger]

On 01/17/2018 04:32 PM, Jason Self wrote:
> That's already a thing: One of the criteria in the GNU FSDG is that "to 
> be listed, a distribution should be actively maintained."
i would strongly suggest that guideline be changed to require the distro
only to be available and functional and to remove it only if it were
found to contain something malicious or non-free - as i pointed out in
my previous post, "Live" distros such as dynebolic are intentionally
designed to be forever static in form and never modified; but only
replaced entirely with a new release (or not) - the FSDG does not
require that a new release be perpetually forth-coming; and this FSDG
guideline jason mentions, if strictly applied, would exclude dynebolic
and musix from endorsement by their very nature of not being amenable to
"maintenance"



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [GNU-linux-libre] [gnu.org #1262331] (inactive Linux distributions)

[bill-auger]

where is this ticket that you reference? gnu.org #1262331 - it is not on
the CC list - is that a on public tracker?

On 01/17/2018 11:45 AM, Therese Godefroy via RT wrote:
> Should a distro that hasn't been maintained for several years be
listed in free-distros.html, especially if it is based on a major distro
which itself isn't maintained anymore? I am thinking of Blag, based on
Fedora 10 (2010).

i asked this question myself when i did a review of the FSDG distros
list last summer[1] noting that proteanos appears to be inactive as well
- still today there has been no response on either of the blag or
proteanos mailing lists[2][3] - six months with no response to a simple
question like "is this project still active?" should indicate a negative
answer

my opinion however, is that there is no reason to remove a distro from
the list only for being unmaintained - if it works: it works - and
always will - but the case with blag is something different - blag
actually has no software available - the download links on their website
have not worked in a very long time because (as ive heard) the files
were lost - "blag" exists in reality only in the form of it's website -
so there literally is no blag distribution by nature of the fact that
there is nothing being distributed - so i still suggest that blag be
removed (or perhaps moved to a new "honerable mentions" section) - but
if proteanos is still available and viable software then there is no
reason to remove it merely because it is un-supported


On 01/17/2018 11:45 AM, Therese Godefroy via RT wrote:
> Conversely, if unmaintained distros are listed, is there any good
reason not to list a new one, which clearly is actively maintained (Uruk)?

there is an evaluation process for adding new distros - uruk has
requested consideration about a year ago and it fell short of FSDG
standards at that time; but they are improving it and the discussion is
still open[4]


On 01/17/2018 11:45 AM, Therese Godefroy via RT wrote:
> Le Dim 31 Déc 2017 15:50:11, anonym...@foto.nl1.torservers.net a écrit :
>> BLAG is inactive
>> Dragora GNU Linux-Libre is inactive
>> Dynebolic is inactive
>> Musix is inactive


it was this comment that prompted me to respond - as mentioned above, i
looked into the current status of all of the FSDG distro last summer and
i can not concour with Le Dim's evaluation

dragora has been very active in recent months working on the next
release - far from being inactive, if all FSDG distros were ranked today
according to development activity, i would place dragora in second place
closely behind parabola with trisquel a more distant third - of course,
to put into persoective, parabola, being a rolling release distro
requires a far greater amount of routine maintenance just to remain sane
where the other FSDG distros are LTS and designed to require only
high-priority stability/security upgrades - that is only to say that
some distros require more or less maintenance than others

the developer of dynebolic is still as active as ever in the dyne
project and is planning for the next release of dynebolic to be based on
devuan once the devuan-sdk is completed

the musix developer is also still in contact with it's community and is
planning the next release[5]

the important thing to note is that regardless of whatever development
activity is immediately apparent, the current releases of dragora,
dynebolic, and musix are still available and viable, functioning
perfectly as intended; and their developers are still in communication
with the community - this is an especially important factor to consider
in regards to "Live" distros such as dynebolic and musix which are
static by design (i.e. they are intended to be run directly from the
read-only medium and never installed nor upgraded) - the fact that the
operating system is guaranteed never to change a bit from one boot to
the next is among the most desirable features of these distros - they
are not the typical sort of distro that require any intermediate
maintenance nor is that even possible; so such a distro can not
reasonably be said to be "inactive"; because they are designed to be
fixed in form ("carved in stone" if you will) - the project itself could
be be deemed dormant or inactive; as in: "we can probably not expect
version N+1"; but that says nothing of the efficacy of any current
available versions


[1]:
https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2017-08/msg0.html
[2]: https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/blag-whereto/2017-July/thread.html
[3]: http://lists.proteanos.com/proteanos-dev/2017/08/
[4]:
https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2017-12/msg3.html
[5]: https://musixdistro.wordpress.com/




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [GNU-linux-libre] [gnu.org #1262331] (inactive Linux distributions)

[Jason Self]

Therese Godefroy via RT  wrote ..
> Should a distro that hasn't been maintained for several years be listed 
> in free-distros.html, especially if it is based on a major distro which 
> itself isn't maintained anymore? I am thinking of Blag, based on Fedora
> 10 (2010).

That's already a thing: One of the criteria in the GNU FSDG is that "to 
be listed, a distribution should be actively maintained." When this has 
come up in the past, the determination of being actively maintained was 
said to rest with the distro maintainers and if *they* consider it to be 
maintained or not (as opposed to, say, moving slowly.)

For some examples my understanding is that people are working on BLAG, 
and Dragora has published a new beta version for 3.0. It seems better to 
try to support such efforts instead of dropping them. We need more people 
working on 100% free distros, not less. :)

> Conversely, if unmaintained distros are listed, is there any good 
> reason not to list a new one, which clearly is actively maintained 
> (Uruk)?

Provided that Uruk (or, really, any new one) successfully completes the 
standard review process and is added by FSF staff. (The GNU Webmasters 
should not be adding new ones as per 
https://www.gnu.org/server/standards/#distros)

[GNU-linux-libre] [gnu.org #1262331] (inactive Linux distributions)

[Therese Godefroy via RT]

Hello,

Although this ticket only makes unsupported statements, the OP may have a point.

Should a distro that hasn't been maintained for several years be listed in 
free-distros.html, especially if it is based on a major distro which itself 
isn't maintained anymore? I am thinking of Blag, based on Fedora 10 (2010).

Conversely, if unmaintained distros are listed, is there any good reason not to 
list a new one, which clearly is actively maintained (Uruk)?  

Best regards,
Thérèse


Le Dim 31 Déc 2017 15:50:11, anonym...@foto.nl1.torservers.net a écrit :
> 
> BLAG is inactive
> 
> Dragora GNU Linux-Libre is inactive
> 
> Dynebolic is inactive
> 
> Musix is inactive
> 
> happy a new year
>