On Fri, 15 May 2015 05:34:33 +0200 (CEST) ja...@bluehome.net wrote: > And even though I had said it wasn't an issue (see > https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2012-01/msg00007.html) > Henry brought it up again in a reply to that very message (see > https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2012-01/msg00008.html > which even quotes that part of the message) and continued discussing it as if > > it were. I'm not sure why.
Because you wrote "... calling themselves "open source" rather than free software" This wasn't the case and I had to clarify that. > From my perspective, ConnochaetOS completed the community review process > which is the only part of the endorsement process that the gnu-linux-libre > mailing list is involved in - making sure that the distro actually is a > feasible candidate, which I did and posted my results in the message I've > linked to. The FSF staff are supposed to take it from there. If nothing else > happened after that, it is best to follow up directly with the FSF staff for > further information. This is the first time I hear about that. It was unclear to me, that "the FSF staff are supposed to take it from there". Of course I contacted them in the first place - but I got no reply. I got no message from the FSF at all, so I could only conclude that ConnochaetOS wasn't accepted because of that issue - or other reasons. Yes, you and others said, that this isn't an issue regarding the endorsement process - but nevertheless it was mentioned several times by different people again and again. It even led to a small dispute between RMS and the president of the FSF Europe, from what I heard (http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2011-08/msg00063.html) Being such a "hot" topic I doubt that ConnochaetOS was simply forgotten by the FSF staff. It's still unclear to me, what went wrong.
