[libreplanet-discuss] opinions please: expanding the definition of "software freedom"

[Miles Fidelman]

Folks,

I've been watching the ongoing battles raging around systemd - and being 
bitten by it, as I consider upgrading a bunch of Debian based system, 
and dread the lurking dependencies that come with a radical 
re-architecting of critical system components.

The weekend of Libreplanet seems to be as good an opportunity to raise 
this, as any.

I've begun to wonder if there is a conflict between software freedom and 
key pieces of software that create massive dependency webs.  Or put 
another way, "vendor lock-in."

The basic FSF definition of software freedom focuses on four basic freedoms:

 * The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0).
 * The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does
   your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is
   a precondition for this.
 * The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor
   (freedom 2).
 * The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others
   (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance
   to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a
   precondition for this.

I begin to wonder if programs that create massive dependencies - such as 
systemd - directly conflict with freedom 0.  The more that a specific 
piece of code becomes required, for other code to work - the less free 
we become to run other programs.   In general, there has been a trend 
toward cross-platform development, along with cleanly defined interfaces 
that allow for interchangeable parts (e.g., exim vs. postfix vs. 
sendmail).  To date, this carries down to the o/s level (Linux vs. Hurd 
vs. BSD vs. Illumos).   But systemd reverses that, creating a LOT of 
vendor lock-in.  (I expect there are other examples, but systemd is the 
one that's on stage at the moment - some would say the clear and present 
danger.)

One might also argue that systemd, in particular, conflicts with freedom 
1 - in terms of feature creep, poorly documented code, changing APIs, 
etc., etc.

Which leads me to wonder if we, perhaps, need a 5th freedom:

 * "Freedom from vendor lock-in," or words to that effect.

One might also want to consider whether the spread of spyware and 
malware might inspire a 6th freedom:

 * "Freedom from hidden software" or something like that.

Or maybe, these are both part of "freedom to control the configuration 
of your computing system."

Opinions?

Miles Fidelman


--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra