libreplanet-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

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


From: Tobias Platen
Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] opinions please: expanding the definition of "software freedom"
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2015 21:45:22 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.5.0

systemd is still free software but it is not portable, So for me this is not a problem.

On 22.03.2015 21:32, Miles Fidelman wrote:
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






reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]