Intro to standards.texi

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

Any comments on this proposed change?

--- standards.texi.~1.268.~     2020-08-23 18:00:28.687283760 -0400
+++ standards.texi      2021-07-23 12:58:59.832493654 -0400
@@ -2935,18 +2935,33 @@
 versions.  For a GNU program, this kind of portability is desirable, but
 not paramount.
 
-The primary purpose of GNU software is to run on top of the GNU kernel,
-compiled with the GNU C compiler, on various types of CPU@.  So the
-kinds of portability that are absolutely necessary are quite limited.
-But it is important to support Linux-based GNU systems, since they
-are the form of GNU that is popular.
-
-Beyond that, it is good to support the other free operating systems
-(*BSD), and it is nice to support other Unix-like systems if you want
-to.  Supporting a variety of Unix-like systems is desirable, although
-not paramount.  It is usually not too hard, so you may as well do it.
-But you don't have to consider it an obligation, if it does turn out to
-be hard.
+The primary purpose of GNU software is to run as part of the GNU
+operating system, compiled with GNU compilers, on various types of
+hardware.  So the kinds of portability that are absolutely necessary
+are quite limited.  It is important to support Linux-based GNU
+systems, since they are the form of GNU that people mainly use.
+
+Making a GNU program operate on operating systems other than the GNU
+system is not part of the core goal of developing a GNU package.  You
+don't ever have to do that.  However, users will ask you to do that,
+and cooperating with those requests is useful---as long as you don't
+let it run away with the project.
+
+It is good to support the other free or nearly free operating systems
+(for instance, *BSD).  Supporting a variety of Unix-like systems is
+desirable, although not paramount.  It is usually not too hard, so you
+may as well do it.  But you don't have to consider it an obligation,
+if it does turn out to be hard.
+
+For the most part it is good to port the program to more platforms,
+but you should not let take up so much of your time that it hinders
+you from improving the program in more central ways.  If it starts to
+do that, please tell users that you don't want to spend any more
+time on this---someone else must write that code, debug it, document
+it, etc., and then you can install it.
+
+You can reject porting patches for technical reasons too, as with any
+other patch that users submit.  It is up to you.
 
 @pindex autoconf
 The easiest way to achieve portability to most Unix-like systems is to

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)