This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Revert Abortion joke removal.


On May  9, 2018, Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh@gotplt.org> wrote:

> On the contrary I claim that you're confusing the FSF agenda with the
> GNU core values, something RMS also conceded are distinct, just that
> he doesn't see the problem with the ambiguity.

Ok, I guess I should have elaborated on that point before, since you've
stated that misunderstanding before and I chose not to pursue it.

The FSF is exclusively about freedoms and rights related with software,
including human rights that are affected by software.

GNU is about developing software for the ethical reasons behind the Free
Software movement, reasons that make essential the four freedoms that
apply equally to software, documentation, and any other kind of
information for practical use.

So, you see, the GNU agenda is broader, not narrower, than the FSF's, in
spite of the *means* to advance that agenda being narrower, namely,
developing and publishing software and its corresponding documentation,
rather than all sorts of political and social activism.

For this reason, GNU might advance agendas that are slightly out of
scope for the FSF.  This is one such case: opposition to censorship laws
about information for practical use is in scope for GNU, but if the
information is not in some way related with software or its
documentation, and their users in their uses thereof, it is probably out
of scope for the FSF.

It is in scope for the Free Software movement, though: it has to do with
the ethical reasons and the essential freedoms.

> That hostile organization could be the FSF too.  What's the guarantee
> that RMS or whoever replaces him as the benevolent leader in future

You don't say it, but this (partial) paragraph might be interpreted as
implying that it is the FSF that appoints the Chief GNUisance.  AFAIK,
it's not.  I honestly don't know how Richard's sucessor in that position
will be appointed, but I assume Richard himself will nominate the
successor, if he's retiring, and that he's left a will nominating one
should he be hit by a bus.  Failing that, we'll probably have to get GNU
maintainers together and choose a new leader or a new power structure.
It's not without risk, indeed.

> does not abuse their power to do exactly what you propose could
> happen?

The freedom to fork has kept Richard's power in check, and that won't go
away with whatever succeeds him.

What's to everyone's advantage (including our enemies) is that Richard,
warts and all, is so predictable and consistent.  We can count on him to
remain loyal to the Free Software principles, and to step even on
allies' shoes occasionally.  That loyalty can't be counted on of many
others.  I don't envy his future successors: it will be very very hard
for them to be in his shoes.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter    http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/
You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi
Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/   FSF Latin America board member
Free Software Evangelist|Red Hat Brasil GNU Toolchain Engineer


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]