Re: [GNU-linux-libre] what of the distros that have already asked for consideration or have been partially evaluated?
On Wednesday, March 21, 2018 19:47:37 Jason Self wrote: > bill-auger wrote .. > > > BTW - the actual OP for free-slack is here: > https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2016-07/msg00021.html > > OK so freeslack can probably be updated that it's on hold pending a > name change. (Based on Donald's 2017-04-06 email quoted at > https://www.freeslack.net/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=7&goto=15&#msg_15) > > Although do we still consider it on hold if it's been over a year? > Things can change in that time; perhaps distros should be expected to > re-apply and start from scratch in cases where a large amount of time > has gone by. Erm, you would want distro maintainers to re-do the paperwork because FSF took a year evaluating a simple query? Or, as it feels more likely in this particular case, leaving it on the back burner and doing nothing at all? I think it would be more in line with FSDG evaluation process to simply assume that no new bugs crept in during this time, based on the fact that no bugs were made known to maintainers via the mailing list or a private channel. This is consistent with the existing policy of not continually evaluating the distro after it's been accepted. Assuming good faith on the part of distro maintainers, FSF currently hopes that *reported* freedom bugs will be fixed in a timely manner. If there is an outstanding, reported bug which hasn't been fixed in a specified period of time, then I think it is suitable to revoke the certification, or to kick the approval process back to square 1. In case with FreeSlack though, there are no outstanding freedom issues, and the only open issue is in the FSF's court. I believe that re-doing the application would be redundant, and would just waste everyone's time. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [GNU-linux-libre] what of the distros that have already asked for consideration or have been partially evaluated?
bill-auger wrote .. > BTW - the actual OP for free-slack is here: > https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2016-07/msg00021.html OK so freeslack can probably be updated that it's on hold pending a name change. (Based on Donald's 2017-04-06 email quoted at https://www.freeslack.net/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=7&goto=15&#msg_15) Although do we still consider it on hold if it's been over a year? Things can change in that time; perhaps distros should be expected to re-apply and start from scratch in cases where a large amount of time has gone by. Perhaps this means that the section "Distros that are defunct or do not comply with the GNU FSDG" needs updating.
Re: [GNU-linux-libre] what of the distros that have already asked for consideration or have been partially evaluated?
A pretty good and very current summary of FreeSlack review process can be found here: https://www.freeslack.net/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=7&goto=15&#msg_15 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [GNU-linux-libre] what of the distros that have already asked for consideration or have been partially evaluated?
On 03/21/2018 01:34 PM, bill-auger wrote: > krt send this to me personally - i will repost > > On 03/21/2018 03:22 PM, KRT Listmaster wrote: oops, I musta hit the wrong reply button. silly mistake on my part. Thanks for catching, that, Bill, and for finding the original FreeSlack post. - krt -- This email account is used for list management only. https://strangetimes.observer/
Re: [GNU-linux-libre] what of the distros that have already asked for consideration or have been partially evaluated?
krt send this to me personally - i will repost On 03/21/2018 03:22 PM, KRT Listmaster wrote: > On 03/21/2018 12:54 PM, bill-auger wrote: > > [...] > >> info - it is not clear though if freeslack or libertybsd have explicitly >> expressed interest - without combing over the history myself, does >> anyone know the history of these on this list? > > Yes, definitely the FreeSlack devs expressed explicit interest on this > list, > > https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2016-08/msg3.html > > and I would say the same for LibertyBSD as well. > > https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2014-12/msg2.html > > https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2015-02/msg3.html > > thanks, > > - krt > BTW - the actual OP for free-slack is here: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2016-07/msg00021.html ok thanks krt - those links are pretty convincing - so the real question is "should these be grandfathered into the process and their entries moved from "Distros that have requested consideration" to "Distros currently being evaluated by the community" and have an evaluation results page created for them immediately - or should they be asked to start from the begining of the new protocol by sending email to the GNU webmasters if bypassing the GNU webmasters for these, the new protocol requires at least that each be assigned a community review manager now signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[GNU-linux-libre] what of the distros that have already asked for consideration or have been partially evaluated?
i just re-worded the work-flow related headings on the "incoming
distros" wiki page to avoid confusion - most notably the former heading:
"Distros ready to be evaluated by the FSF licensing team" which had four
distros listed beneath - that was changed to: "Distros that have
requested consideration"
those four distros are:
* connochaetos
* freeslack
* hyperbola
* libertybsd
the problem is that there is no indication here that those dostros
actually have requested consideration - previously, these entries have
been nominated by anyone (and perhaps without even informing the mailing
list) so it is not clear if all of these are actually interested in
endorsement - the ones that i added personally ('gnuinos' and 'heads')
were requested by their maintainers and i added their contact info to
the listing - i think contact info should be added for the others as
well - connochaetos and hyperbola i do know have a demonstrable history
on the mailing list of the maintainers interest so i added their contact
info - it is not clear though if freeslack or libertybsd have explicitly
expressed interest - without combing over the history myself, does
anyone know the history of these on this list?
or, should the "slate be wiped clean" and connochaetos, hyperbola, and
possibly the others be asked to start from the beginning of the new
protocol?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
