Send advisory-board mailing list submissions to
advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
advisory-board-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
You can reach the person managing the list at
advisory-board-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of advisory-board digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Proposal: Revision of policy surrounding 3rd party and
non-free software (Jóhann B. Guðmundsson)
2. Re: Proposal: Revision of policy surrounding 3rd party and
non-free software (Eric H. Christensen)
3. Re: Proposal: Revision of policy surrounding 3rd party and
non-free software (inode0)
4. Re: Proposal: Revision of policy surrounding 3rd party and
non-free software (Matthew Garrett)
5. Re: Proposal: Revision of policy surrounding 3rd party and
non-free software (Adam Williamson)
6. Re: Proposal: Revision of policy surrounding 3rd party and
non-free software (Eric H. Christensen)
7. Re: Proposal: Revision of policy surrounding 3rd party and
non-free software (Adam Williamson)
8. Re: Proposal: Revision of policy surrounding 3rd party and
non-free software (Jóhann B. Guðmundsson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 21:14:47 +0000
From: "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx>
To: advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Proposal: Revision of policy surrounding 3rd party and
non-free software
Message-ID: <52DEE347.8050608@xxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
On 01/21/2014 08:53 PM, Christian Schaller wrote:
In the end the main question for me is if we are prepared to trust the
working groups to make the products they have been tasked with making,
or are we going to second guess them every step of the way?
I think you should be more concerned if the community actually supports
the next and wg effort then fesco breathing down yours and other wg's
neck especially after such an attack on our foundation.
JBG
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 16:23:55 -0500
From: "Eric H. Christensen" <sparks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Fedora community advisory board
<advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Proposal: Revision of policy surrounding 3rd party and
non-free software
Message-ID: <20140121212355.GF30387@localhost.localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-action=pgp-signed
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 03:53:41PM -0500, Christian Schaller wrote:
In the end the main question for me is if we are prepared to trust the
working groups to make the products they have been tasked with making,
or are we going to second guess them every step of the way?
Really? What you are asking is hardly "every step of the way". What
you're asking for is a rewrite of the foundation for what the Project was
founded. You worry about losing users because we don't make it easy to use
non-FOSS software. I worry about losing contributors when you start
changing the beliefs of the Project. In my opinion, you haven't provided a
very good arguement as to why we should fundamentally change what we've
stood for for the past ten years.
- -- Eric
- --------------------------------------------------
Eric "Sparks" Christensen
Fedora Project
sparks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx - sparks@xxxxxxxxxx
097C 82C3 52DF C64A 50C2 E3A3 8076 ABDE 024B B3D1
- --------------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1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=SYds
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 15:34:52 -0600
From: inode0 <inode0@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Fedora community advisory board
<advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Proposal: Revision of policy surrounding 3rd party and
non-free software
Message-ID:
<CAAHfup=
4fbYHgQKZ70xrfosQPNbqXzzBhOwF1b7E-eq_PsHYuQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 01:20:20PM -0500, Christian Schaller wrote:
Ok, just to be sure I understood you, you want the metadata stored on
a server and have it downloaded from there by the Software
installation application as opposed to shipped on the ISO image? I
don't have a problem with that.
No, I mean I want the metadata to be provided by the vendor and for the
user to obtain that metadata from the vendor. I don't want Fedora to
have anything to do with that metadata.
Do you object to the app going out and obtaining the metadata from the
vendor on behalf of the user after such time as the user opts-in in
some fashion?
/me isn't endorsing that solution, just wondering how people feel about it.
John
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 21:38:07 +0000
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Proposal: Revision of policy surrounding 3rd party and
non-free software
Message-ID: <20140121213807.GA10809@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 03:34:52PM -0600, inode0 wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
No, I mean I want the metadata to be provided by the vendor and for the
user to obtain that metadata from the vendor. I don't want Fedora to
have anything to do with that metadata.
Do you object to the app going out and obtaining the metadata from the
vendor on behalf of the user after such time as the user opts-in in
some fashion?
Yes.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 13:53:29 -0800
From: Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: Fedora community advisory board
<advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Proposal: Revision of policy surrounding 3rd party and
non-free software
Message-ID: <1390341209.26723.231.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 13:37 -0500, Christian Schaller wrote:
Our influence with the rest of the world and promoting freedom rests on
us having users and obviously the
way we have been building Fedora and the policies around Fedora used so
far is not giving us that.
This is the bit of the movie where the background music turns ominous
and the hero is offered a choice: stick to his principles and tough it
out, or accept the apparently small compromise in one little corner of
his value set which will allow him to spread the rest of that value set
to the world. Right?
I think we've all seen how those movies end.
I would like it on the record that I consider Fedora's current values -
specifically, our *commitment to* (not just *preference for*) libre
software - an immense social and technical good, I am strongly committed
to those values, I am strongly opposed to this change (defined as 'any
change which leads to the seamless availability of non-libre software in
Fedora products'), and I might have to re-consider my work on Fedora if
this change were to be approved.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 16:57:37 -0500
From: "Eric H. Christensen" <sparks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Fedora community advisory board
<advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Proposal: Revision of policy surrounding 3rd party and
non-free software
Message-ID: <20140121215737.GH30387@localhost.localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-action=pgp-signed
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 01:53:29PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
I would like it on the record that I consider Fedora's current values -
specifically, our *commitment to* (not just *preference for*) libre
software - an immense social and technical good, I am strongly committed
to those values, I am strongly opposed to this change (defined as 'any
change which leads to the seamless availability of non-libre software in
Fedora products'), and I might have to re-consider my work on Fedora if
this change were to be approved.
+1
- -- Eric
- --------------------------------------------------
Eric "Sparks" Christensen
Fedora Project
sparks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx - sparks@xxxxxxxxxx
097C 82C3 52DF C64A 50C2 E3A3 8076 ABDE 024B B3D1
- --------------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1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=lCGT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 13:58:58 -0800
From: Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: Fedora community advisory board
<advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Proposal: Revision of policy surrounding 3rd party and
non-free software
Message-ID: <1390341538.26723.233.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 13:09 -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 03:53:41PM -0500, Christian Schaller wrote:
In the end the main question for me is if we are prepared to trust the
working groups to make the products they have been tasked with making,
or are we going to second guess them every step of the way?
Note -- this is a different question that has come to FESCo as well:
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1195
The answer there is that there will probably always be a degree of
oversight
from FESCo over the Working Groups. In the short term, this oversight
will
be much more intrusive and "get in the way" of what the working groups
want
to do. As time goes on and decisions about what FESCo would like the
working groups to do independently of FESCo become more apparent there
will
be less of these cases because FESCo and the Working Groups will have
sufficient cases to be more sure of the decision making boundaries.
I'd also suggest that the degree of trust and licence given to the WGs
by FESCo is natural going to depend on what they do with it.
The fact that one of the earlier actions of this WG, before producing
anything at all concrete, is to propose a drastic dilution of Fedora's
founding principles...does not bode well for how much others involved in
the project are likely to trust it to act without oversight in the
future.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 22:10:02 +0000
From: "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx>
To: advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Proposal: Revision of policy surrounding 3rd party and
non-free software
Message-ID: <52DEF03A.3060106@xxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
On 01/21/2014 09:23 PM, Eric H. Christensen wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 03:53:41PM -0500, Christian Schaller wrote:
In the end the main question for me is if we are prepared to trust the
working groups to make the products they have been tasked with making,
or are we going to second guess them every step of the way?
Really? What you are asking is hardly "every step of the way". What
you're asking for is a rewrite of the foundation for what the Project was
founded. You worry about losing users because we don't make it easy to use
non-FOSS software. I worry about losing contributors when you start
changing the beliefs of the Project. In my opinion, you haven't provided a
very good arguement as to why we should fundamentally change what we've
stood for for the past ten years.
Let's not forget doing so for a new software installer integrated into a
*single* desktop environment of those many we maintain and deliver into
the hands of our end user base but it's good to know that the
workstation wg has already *decide* which desktop environment is going
to be representing which is as I had expected to be from the forming of
the wg's...
JBG
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
End of advisory-board Digest, Vol 93, Issue 10
**********************************************
