-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 04/21/2014 11:56 AM, Eric H. Christensen wrote: > On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 08:36:55AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: >> ...I'd like to suggest a fifth Foundation, one to ultimately >> supersede all the rest: "Functional". > > I think anytime anyone suggests a new foundation that supersedes > all of what the project and community has stood for for many years > then they are doing it wrong. I mean, Fedora has traditionally > been very strong in upholding the values of FOSS. We live it, feed > it, and use it. Does this mean that Fedora isn't always great when > dealing with proprietary solutions later on (like Flash)? Sure, > but that also means that there is more of a push to get FOSS > solutions in place that remedy those issues. Fedora has never > forebade a user to install third-party software (proprietary or > otherwise) after the I spoke too strongly there, I think. We do however give a *very* strong impression that using non-FOSS solutions for anything at all is unwelcome at best. Consider the recent discussions around GNOME Software where we have 1) Forbidden it from automatically looking up software from non-Fedora repositories, even FOSS ones 2) Asserted that it must consider web apps (either FOSS or not) to be second-class citizens (and call it out as such) > fact. The fact that many (most?) users don't have to do such > things is a testiment to how well FOSS has been developed and meets > the needs of our users. > Please understand, I'm as much a proponent of FOSS as anyone here. I believe it to be the best way to develop software. However, I also feel that actively discouraging users from using the tools with which they are most comfortable on our platform is harmful to our long-term strategy of converting them. Microsoft had great success with "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" and I think that FOSS can enjoy very similar results (probably without Extinguish, except in cases where user interest in the original wanes) as long as we make it approachable. I don't see that as the case today. > I'm also concerned over the word "functional". I've seen some > disturbing trends in Fedora that points to an all-out attack on > FOSS in the name of "functionality". To me, this lowers the value > of Fedora and makes me question not only the operating system I use > on a daily basis but also the number of hours I spend supporting > the project that used to have strong values towards FOSS. One > person's "functional" is another person's "disfunctional". > Eric, I'm not trying to start a flame-war with you. I do, however, feel that the best way to convert people to the Open Source Way is to do so gradually, coaching them on why it's a better choice. Right now, what we're building is a system that caters only to those who have already drunk the Kool-Aid(TM) on every level. It offers no ramp-up and no path to enlightenment. In effect, we're an exclusive club that you can only join if you happen to have exactly the right beliefs. >> Now, let me be further clear on this: I am not in any way >> advocating the use of closed-source software or services. I am >> not suggesting that we start carrying patent-encumbered software. >> I think it is absolutely the mission of Fedora to show people >> that FOSS is the better long-term solution. However, in my >> experience a person who is exposed to open source and allowed to >> migrate in their own time is one who is more likely to become a >> lifelong supporter. A person who is told "if you switch to >> Fedora, you must stop using Application X" is a person who is not >> running Fedora. > > I'm confused here. No one is telling anyone that they can't use > Application X. Users are, and have always been, free to install > and use whatever software they choose. That said, Fedora shouldn't > be No, they haven't. At least, not without finding workarounds to things that should be very simple. > packaging or otherwise making it easier for one to choose > proprietary software. When we start pushing proprietary solutions > in our "software store" right along side FOSS solutions we are > devaluing our FOSS and making it easier for people to ignore the > software we hope they'll migrate to. This is a key point that I disagree with entirely. I think we could attract many more users if we were the easiest way for them to get a free, open-source friendly operating system that also allowed them to continue using the tools they want to use. I don't think it's unreasonable for us to allow them to use Chrome from the Google repository. I don't think it's unreasonable to allow them to use Steam from the Valve repository. Device drivers get into hazy territory, but I think it's a conversation worth having. What about solutions that have no useful FOSS analog? Are you expecting that someone who uses Adobe Lightroom all the time should switch to Fedora and write a brand-new post-processing engine themselves? > > If you aren't advocating close-source solutions then why are you > advocating a new foundation that supersedes the foundation of > freedom? I'm advocating that they should have a place at the table. I don't advocate placing them "above" FOSS solutions (and I'm perfectly happy with requiring that any tool that provides access to them clearly identify them as such and ideally recommend a FOSS alternative instead). But I think that trying to actively discourage (read: prevent) users from installing such software is harmful to our Mission of advancing Free Software. In my view, it's okay to occasionally embrace closed-source as a means to expose more people to open-source. Failing to do so has a tendency to leave us labeled as zealots, which are often ignored. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlNVSWUACgkQeiVVYja6o6NRYQCfQQSAIH0/uE4H6lUU5Bb7DbFB 1REAoJuA8l6Avsl9iUHFYxsDk4LL1p/x =tiLK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
