#57: Seeking Council feedback/input on draft third party software policy -------------------------+--------------------- Reporter: pfrields | Owner: Status: new | Priority: normal Component: General | Resolution: Keywords: workstation | -------------------------+--------------------- Comment (by pfrields): Replying to [comment:9 mattdm]: > I'd like to separate my feedback on this into two parts. I think the first is relatively > easy. That is: > > mattdm proposal part 1: > > The Fedora Council is generally in favor of a policy like this for third-party software which conforms to Fedora's definition of free and open source software. The policy must specify that the distinction between software provided by Fedora and external software is clear to non-advanced end users. The process for selection/curation of third-party software by Working Groups or SIGs must be community-based and transparent. > > I think that's pretty straightforward. Maybe a little wordy. :) Does anyone have objections to tthat? This would allow references to, for example, third-party FlatPak or Docker repositories of free software. *Slightly* less wordy? "The Fedora Council supports a third-party software policy that conforms to Fedora's definition of free and open source software. The policy must require a distinction between Fedora-provided and third-party software that is clear to novice users. The selection and curation process for third-party software must be community-based and transparent." > Honestly, I'm not sold on that alone. I think our users have no problem going to the web sites for that popular software, and if there are FlatPaks or whatever there, that's probably fine. However, I think by doing that, we actually miss an opportunity for education: when they go to the site for some proprietary software, users just see that. We can use our power in Fedora to gently educate about the value of free software and promote alternatives. > > I agree with Josh that we shouldn't dictate implementation details at the council level, but I'd ''really'' like the designers to think about truly advancing this goal through UX design - something ''beyond'' annoying pop-up dialogs. As an example, if someone searches for "web browser", Firefox should come up above Chrome or Opera or whatever. > > In fact, I'm inclined to prefer a design where unless an opt-in has been configured (the search tags in one mock-up I saw), only free and open source software would show by default, with perhaps a message like ''"Other results appear in the [nonfree] tag, which is currently filtered out. Click to reset this filter. Fedora does not endorse non-free software. Learn more about [free software and open source software and why this matters....]"''. I know that's implementation, but I mean it by way of example. I think putting a click in front of people is bad behavior -- like the "Are you sure? Y/N" prompt, or security related dialogs that reduce security by training people to react without thinking. I feel like labeling in Software, for example, already neatly solves this problem. I immediately know I'm getting something non-free. Perhaps there are changes that could even more effectively make it clear I'm getting something not endorsed by Fedora. But the filter/click doesn't seem useful to me. Nevertheless, I'd rather get somewhere with this proposal than argue about whether or not to require a click-thru to opt in. As long as we can make the choice persistent, I could live with this. I'm not speaking for the whole Workstation WG here, though. I expect more feedback there, and I don't know the technical constraints for design or development. > I'm willing to try something like this to see if it works. Fedora ''should'' have the flexibility to try things, after all, and I see this as a way to try a new way to advance our ultimate mission. If it is not successful, we can revisit. This. Thanks. > mattdm proposal part 2: > > The Council recognizes the inclusion of select third-party non-free software in search results as a valid experiment in advancing Fedora's mission. Such search results should prioritize free and open source software, clearly specify that there is no endorsement, and offer links to Fedora-prepared educational information. Additionally, default configuration in Fedora Editions and Spins must hide non-free results from search - although opting in need not be onerous (i.e., it can be a visible filter rather than a buried checkbox, and there can be an indicator that non-free results were hidden). > > Council, What do you all think? Paul/Christian/Workstation, does this meet what you're looking for? Rest of Fedora community, what do you think and how do you feel about all this? I think part 2 wording is confusing, for instance using "hide" where either you may not mean hide, or you specifically said you don't want to dictate implementation. I understand what you mean but the language is confusing. Again, this is why I feel like the labeling effectively solves the problem already. Perhaps "delineate" would be better here, but I understand you may not feel labeling is *enough* delineation. I would encourage some better language here, though, and that if you don't want to dictate implementation, don't. :-) -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/57#comment:10> council <https://fedorahosted.org/council> Fedora Council Public Tickets _______________________________________________ council-discuss mailing list council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx The Fedora Project's mission is to lead the advancement of free and open source software and content as a collaborative community.
