Hi Jacob,
> There seem to be two
> different people both named Andreas here,
This is correct. Unfortunately, even though Jean-Louis is a very spirited
defender of GNU, I feel his zeal sometimes gets in the way of reading
comprehension. It happened before, and correcting him on the matter
eople/
lists more than 30 people from the GNU project supporting it.
Andreas
quot;ethical source") and
thereby subvert the goals of the GNU Project by association.
Other than that, I think the GNU Project's general "live and let live"
approach towards maintainers and project development hould be honoured,
even if some Assembly members appear to hold hostile opinions.
Andreas R.
On Sun, Mar 01, 2020 at 03:13:15AM -0500, John Darrington wrote:
>
> I share your concern. Over the last few years many people have noticed
> a shift towards extremist support of idealogy which is orthogonal to the
> Free Software cause. And the board has not kept this in check.
According to
equate reason for the lack of answers or for restructuring
the venue of the discussion to something under your direct control.
thanks,
Andreas R.
to do so, but that I am not pushing for it. It has been discussed on this
list for several months, and version 1.0 was posted on February 10th.
Maybe you want to reopen the discussion for creating a version 1.1, but
this strikes me as premature for a document that has just been finished and
needs to pass the test of time.
Andreas
u claim that GNU maintainers discussing things about
GNU have nothing to do with GNU.
Andreas
orsing
it are valid, however right or wrong one feels these reasons might be.
Doing otherwise would likely lead to accusations going back and forth with
emotions escalating, opinions hardening, and nothing productive being achieved
in the process.
thanks,
Andreas R.
t solve the problem.
My point is made, I presume.
Andreas
quot;
Indeed I give you this, not kind. You will also find a few instances of
sarcasm here and there.
> "you are simply wrong"
Whereas pointing out factual errors is not a question of kindness,
I would say.
Andreas
with the statement
"You are sick"?
Andreas
t
solve the issue. So maybe it is time to try something else.
Andreas
ain in the discussion; that is definitely not a desirable situation.
Andreas
n of software freedom
- Having input into how other maintainers should run their projects
I don't see how delegating either of these will benefit the GNU
project.
thanks,
Andreas R.
o you are and what you are, people will not be calling you
> this way.
Andreas
PS: Whatever moderation decides, from here on I will not reply to messages
by Kaz Kylheku and Jean Louis, which I am likely to filter out. This
should not be interpreted as consent with their behaviour.
On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 10:26:22AM -0800, Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) wrote:
> On 2020-02-22 01:22, Andreas Enge wrote:
> > And another ad-hominem attack. Can you substantiate the claim of us
> > being
> > powermongers?
>
> https://wiki.gnu.tools/wiki:code-of-co
If you have a problem with a particular person or group, please be calm
and clear.
thanks,
Andreas R.
do not think there has been any such
incidence.
> If you choose to endorse this text, bear in mind
> that the words are imprecise so don't be surprised if, sometime down the road,
> your endorsement is used as a weapon against you when you fall out of favor
> with the powermongers.
And another ad-hominem attack. Can you substantiate the claim of us being
powermongers?
Andreas
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 09:09:47PM +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
> As I see it, the GNU Social Contract
> contains only trivialities in the sense that it summarises values of the
> GNU project that are already there, and as such it is far from extremist.
It could have contained only elem
h free software.
Nonsurprisingly,
I, Andreas Enge, maintainer of package GNU MPC, endorse version 1.0
of the GNU Social Contract, available at
<https://wiki.gnu.tools/gnu:social-contract>.
I think it is a really nice document that summarises our commitments
to the world. :)
Andreas
s
> They are driving people away. It has to stop - and the sooner the better.
Well, you are of course entitled to that opinion, but I am naturally of the
opposite one. And we have received feedback going exactly in that direction,
that our initiative would be a good starting point to make someone come
back to GNU.
Andreas
people, getting
along with some and ignoring others, as they naturally would.
thanks,
Andreas R.
;a simple application of the health criteria you consider significant"
shows that GNU Guile has been a healthy project since its start, and what
you write above is simply not true.
Andreas
Hello Andreas (R.),
On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 02:14:32PM +0100, Andreas R. wrote:
> Could you clarify what this cut-off date of February the 24th means? What
> happens afterwards?
afterwards we know who endorses and who does not :-)
> Since there is no reason for this bloc not to ex
Social Contract, supporting some points, but not others). I do
not think, however, that we should record all potential replies in detail,
as this would just blur everything. I would say that if you do not support
any of the two options, then just do not reply and do not appear under any
of them in the wiki.
Andreas
On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 07:11:31PM +0200, Dmitry Gutov wrote:
> On 14.02.2020 20:03, Andreas Enge wrote:
> > It is both an agreement among us, GNU contributors
>
> It's an agreement between select GNU maintainers.
> Why do you presume to speak for all GNU contributors? Or
Hi Andreas,
On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 07:03:07PM +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
>
> We have invited all GNU maintainers to send a message until February 24,
> the end of the endorsement period,
Could you clarify what this cut-off date of February the 24th means? What
happens afterwards?
her the document strikes a more general chord.
Andreas
Love Free Software” day, and thank you for supporting GNU!
Andreas
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 04:12:04PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
> "Andreas R." writes:
> > The wiki has been described as a tool for *all* GNU maintainers, even
> > though it's only available to a certain subset of GNU maintainers
> > willing to agree to new stipul
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 12:14:20PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> a...@gnu.org (Alfred M. Szmidt) writes:
> > The wiki does not represent the views of the GNU project. Nor will it
> > be hosted on GNU infrastructure, as was made quite clear by the head
> > of the GNU project.
>
> I think we all ag
t.
thanks,
Andreas R.
On Sun, Feb 09, 2020 at 11:13:03PM +0100, Andy Wingo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This mail is intended to provide feedback related to
> https://www.fsf.org/news/fsf-and-gnu.
>
> I will start with my understanding of what we offer each other. My
>
what’s “accepted or followed by the GNU Project”?
Those are two very loaded questions and completely inapproriate in
the current discussion.
> I fail to see a vision for the future of GNU. What you describe is far
> away from the ambition of building a cohesive GNU Project, with shared
>
backwards from your personally preferred outcome.
This also applies to "Ideally this applies to any governance structure
we might come up with or even the current one if we can agree on that."
by presenting structural changes to governance as a fait accompli, even
though that doesn
ools adopt a third party code of conduct over GNU's own Kind
Communications Guidelines?
Like I said: the branding is needlessly confusing.
regard,
Andreas R.
effect?
Also, using the GNU logo is needlessly confusing. Those maintainers visiting
already know what the wiki is for, and the general public might
mistake it for being endorsed by the GNU project.
Andreas R.
not sound like a viable approach to me.
Andreas
members have and what kind of
> team they are part of. Which rights and responsibilities are
> needed to most effectively do the work for each role. What makes
> them empowered to do their work properly.
Thanks, Mark, for the detailed summary of what you think should happen.
I share these goals.
Andreas
a need to restrict their number, or could
each and every developer have the same maintainer responsability? If there
is a fixed number, how could it be related to the size of the project?
It seems natural to me that the GNU libc or GNU Guix should have more
maintainers than GNU MPC, for instance.
Andreas
ime for those who desire change to post a clear set of goals and
a roadmap on how to establish those goals so this governance discussion can
continue in good faith.
Andreas R.
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carthago_delenda_est
on the list and with increasing frequency, and
I believe any maintainers needleswsly leaving the GNU project can never be
considered a constructive outcome to the whole situation, no matter how
much one might disagree with them.
regards,
Andreas R.
> > * The GNU Project and the free software community
> >
> > The GNU project stakeholders are all users of the GNU system as represented
> > by the FSF. As such, an
> > FSF-sponsored maintainer for the GNU system as a whole (the Chief
> > GNUisance) will ensure the GNU Project
> > adheres to F
I may be
so bold. But if someone comes up with an alternative name that expresses
well the intentions behind the document and is short and to the point,
we should discuss it.
Andreas
law
as soon as one wants to register a non-profit.
I think GNU is the only autocratic volunteer organisation I am
contributing to, which, given its goals, is rather ironic.
Andreas
Hello,
On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 04:05:51PM +0100, Andreas R. wrote:
> Andreas Enge, in response to the difference between a "Social contract" and a
> "Code of Conduct" writes on the 6th of November[1]:
> "a social contract, which is a "mission statement"
he volunteers who do the
work so that they organise themselves, but instead expect them to follow
a (let us assume, benevolent) dictator for life?
Andreas
that was the version I used, but I got the date wrong.
> > In response to that request, earlier on-list feedback, and expressed
> > support for having a couple of
> > succinct documents that describe the structure and mission of the GNU
> > project, I composed a version
from the Four Essential Freedoms.
> They are self-evident and make the text longer than necessary.
At the same time, it was nice to have them in for the discussion
and for reference :-)
Thanks for working on the document, personally I am happy with it now.
Andreas
Hi,
This writing, "GNU - Principles and Guidelines", is based on Andreas Elke's
preliminary version
(draft posted on 1 Nov 2019) of a general and concise document that states some
guidelines ("GNU Social Contract")
which came with a request for feedback.
In response
ons is an important first step.
Andreas
on this
mailing list? In any case, I think we should try to implement a collaborative
work space of some form; and maybe experiment with different ones until we
have a satisfying solution.
Andreas
course that has not
been comfortable for everyone involved.
-Andreas
Maybe because there is nothing to say? Richard Stallman, like all other
GNU stakeholders, is evidently welcome to join this public discussion.
So far he has not spoken out, but not because anybody has excluded him.
>From what he wrote on a private mailing list, he is aware of this public
exchange.
Andreas
dures given
to reach that goal other than: "We'll start drafting this unspecified
document and everything will explain itself over time."
It appears to be a messy approach for something as important as
overhauling the governance of the project, so getting people to agree
might be a v
started out as pdtar.
> GCC shares a lot of libraries and components with other projects which are not
> necessarily GNU.
Thanks for your replies! Indeed, the pleasure of free software - we
can "remix"!
Andreas
tinue adding lines to what ends up resembling
a play of Theatre of the Absurd, and likely just ignore your messages in
the future.
Andreas
views.
replying to your and also to Andreas R.'s posting with a similar content.
Indeed both versions are quite similar. I like the first sentence of the GSC
version, since it is a bit more general than "development of the GNU system",
so it includes all other tasks (webmastering, mailing
On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 09:46:56PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Thanks, Andreas, for this new version! Some comments below.
They are integrated into the attached new version. For good measure,
I have capitalised "GNU System" as you did and thrown in a few italics
as suggested.
l GNU packages were replaced by other software, the GNU
project would be reduced to an agency providing a label (or maybe not even
that).
Andreas
e into a new
thread: I am wondering how functional a system is that contains only GNU
packages? It will lack a graphical environment, but with grub, hurd, glibc
and all other low level projects and the toolchain, emacs, it looks to me
as if we still have a functional system. Or am I missing something?
Andreas
admitting this in public.
GNU is a wonderful project, and we are interested in improving it and
making it work better; obviously we have different opinions on how this
can be achieved, but this is perfectly normal, and I see no problem for
an organisation working in the public interest to have such discussions in
public.
Andreas
ng new policy being drawn up without solid explanations or
even an generally accepted way to acquire a mandate for it, might not
necessarily disagree with the new policy, but only the ad-hoc way it's
being implemented.
-Andreas R.
d be intellectually
more honest to state that you are against the goal. After which, there is
indeed little point in continuing the discussion.
Andreas
as a base for going
forward with the GNU Project, but of course it takes the existing into
account.
Andreas
Hello,
On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 12:13:47PM +0100, Andreas wrote:
> This maintainers' lack of accountability
> (...)
> To truly implement such fundamental changes, it would perhaps be better
> to start drafting a solid charter
indeed, this is the implied idea behind "collect
On Thu, 2019-11-07 at 11:12 +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
>
> In that sense, I understand the last paragraph of our open letter as
> an
> invitation to put enlightenment into practice:
> "We think it is now time for GNU maintainers to collectively decide
> about the orga
our own
understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment."
In that sense, I understand the last paragraph of our open letter as an
invitation to put enlightenment into practice:
"We think it is now time for GNU maintainers to collectively decide
about the organization of the project." Overcome our nonage, shape
the GNU Project!
Andreas
st point. How you
can logically conclude that the first three points are "decoration" is beyond
me. You may disagree with this point, other points or even the whole idea of
the document (I understood this from another one of your messages), but please
do not derail the debate with nonsensical arguments.
Andreas
On Wed, 2019-11-06 at 19:31 +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
>
>
> Let me quote once more the paragraph that we are supposedly
> discussing:
> >
> > * GNU welcomes contributions from all and everyone
> > We want to give everyone the opportunity to contribute to our
>
ically exercise the freedoms they should
> have, then we should take action." does seem too generic.
Okay. I dropped the examples (DRM etc.), and kept the other text. I think
it makes sense as a more general mission statement: The FEF (Four Essential
Freedoms, I added capitals) as the
procedure will have
to be decided at some point in time in case harassment occurs; but this is
not the goal of this document.
Of course you are free to send your stream of consciousness to this list,
but if you wish to have an impact on the topic at hand, I would suggest to
make concrete suggestions on wording, or paragraphs to remove or to add.
Andreas
In theory the idea of a meritocracy for a project like GNU sounds
appealing: those who do the most work have the greater say in what
course to set.
Meritocracy seems to naturally embodies an idea of fairness and
inclusion.
The problem is that software is not fungible. As such, some projects
will
e
out of a discussion.
Andreas
ly, we cannot
expect a universal movement for free software to succeed. And there would
not even be a point, actually - it is completely irrelevant how one person
out of 9 billions lives.
Andreas
Nor whether we need to distinguish "Western" from "Eastern", "Northern"
or "Southern"; maybe we should add "regardless of origins" :-)
Andreas
se, non-free software will also be rejected; so there is no
contradiction between the first point, insisting on the four freedoms,
and this point.)
Andreas
On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 16:02 -0500, Thompson, David wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 3:44 PM Andreas wrote:
> >
> > To avoid that it's best to just leave it, as suggested, or else
> > make a
> > serious and well-founded claim and illustrate how it impacts GNU
&g
On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 11:49:03PM +0300, Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
> Andreas Enge wrote:
> > For instance, I would not find it acceptable that a GNU maintainer goes to
> > FOSDEM to give a talk about their newest open source software on a Macbook
>
> Why not? In any case,
impacts GNU and
its functions. I think anything else at this moment in time is simply
detrimental to GNU and any discourse around it.
-Andreas
been somewhat related to GNU.
Andreas
.
And in practice, I have yet to meet a GNU maintainer who would state
"I do not care about the four freedoms, I am just maintaining this random
package that happens to be under the GPL, because of its cool features."
Or is this your case?
Andreas
ur assertion
that moderation was clearly still needed was addressed, sufficiently I
think.
-Andreas
he FSF and us,
the GNU project. While the past and current situation can certainly inform
and inspire us, we may also think of changes. So this is a public discussion
following the call by the FSF to think about the relationship between the two:
https://www.fsf.org/news/fsf-and-gnu
Andreas
ns management (DRM), etc.
>
> I think these examples are too specific and might not be clear in a
> couple of years. The essence seems to be that we are looking out for
> our users so the can effectively have the 4 freedoms. If people
> technically have free software, but cannot practically exercise the
> freedoms they should have, then we should take action.
So you would drop this paragraph, or just the examples?
Andreas
uot; ones: Where are users' freedoms most hurt at the
moment, where can we have the biggest impact? And again, it cannot be done
without the FSF, since it might need funding and donation campaigns.
Andreas
quite a bit and occasionally
left out the rationale for a paragraph.
Everything is of course up for debate, amendments, reversals, in short:
improvement.
Andreas
Proposal of a “GNU Social Contract”
This document states the core commitments of the GNU Project to the
broader free software commu
I am not involved in it.
One of my messages also took a while to arrive, it is probably enough to
wait for a while.
Andreas
ould rely upon to thrive
and grow.
Andreas
nsists almost exclusively of old white men is not
> sustainable.
Do you have ideas on how to change that, maybe on a per-package basis?
For instance, did you experience things in GCC/Binutils or in other
environments that you think might help to attract more women, or more
generally to make diverse groups of potential contributors feel more
welcome?
Andreas
y not a
document which could found a community.
Andreas
ething like this already, but please
feel free to point it out if I am mistaken.
Andreas
e good to explicitly copy-paste the four freedoms; these
are really the core of the endeavour, and they are sufficiently concise.
What do you think? I would volunteer to formulate in a few days a new
version taking the discussion into account.
Andreas
a community project, so I
expect to find interesting content in their fundamental document.
Andreas
hat I
went to back in the days and how it helped get me started down this path.
The software is implemented in C++ with a GTK+ UI and comes licensed under
GPLv3, you may find it here:
https://github.com/andreas-gone-wild/snackis
Please let me know if you have any questions or ideas, or if I'
Am Freitag, 4. Juli 2008 schrieb Miles Bader:
> Andreas Röhler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Maybe take some books from Noam Chomsky or Howard Zinn
> > and read about your political and legal system.
>
> Ah, you're one of _those_...
>
> I was wondering
efend
freedom by empowering courts.
> > I
> > doubt that it can in Germany.
>
Do you need the name, the courts reference?
Greetings
Andreas Röhler
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Am Donnerstag, 3. Juli 2008 schrieb John Hasler:
> I wrote:
> > Please define human dignity.
>
> Andreas Röhler writes:
> > Maybe let's regard a picture to grasp it. Let's look at Nelson Mandela.
>
> A politician.
>
In
Am Donnerstag, 3. Juli 2008 schrieb Ciaran O'Riordan:
>
> Andreas Röhler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Make the check against reality: What with the high
> > ranking persons committing all this while making false
> > claims against Iraq?
>
> And wher
Am Mittwoch, 2. Juli 2008 schrieb John Hasler:
> Andreas Röhler writes:
> > First thing is human dignity...
>
> Please define human dignity.
>
Maybe let's regard a picture to grasp it.
Let's look at Nelson Mandela. It's visible.
> > ...the right of free
Am Mittwoch, 2. Juli 2008 schrieb Ciaran O'Riordan:
>
> Andreas Röhler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > we should not risk being injailed for our publishings
>
> So, authors should have no responsibilities and all laws of libel, slander,
> perjury, etc. should b
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
