[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Brand Names, loyalty and ill Effects
|
From: |
A. Mani |
|
Subject: |
Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Brand Names, loyalty and ill Effects |
|
Date: |
Sun, 31 Jul 2016 23:25:19 +0530 |
On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 10:07 PM, Mike Gerwitz <mtg@gnu.org> wrote:
> We discourage the use of the term "ecosystem":
>
> https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#Ecosystem
>
The ontology suggested is wrong because ecosystems evolve and are not
necessarily free from ethics.
Eco-feminism, for example, is all about ethics.
My use of the word is closer to "state of affairs with reference to
sustainability".
"Free software ecosystems" are "ecosystems" in that sense. So would
"open source ecosystems" be?
>
>> The dynamics of development within these groups suggests
>> that the active developers have accepted the state of affairs.
>>
>> What may be a possible solution?
>
> What is the problem you want to solve?
>
The problem I want to solve is a problem of governance within projects
like the ones that I mentioned.
Over time they have lost on diversity in content relative development.
How do those projects really sustain diversity in development?
Potential new developers are often put off by the state of affairs and
many of the more free distro projects
are not doing enough in the situation.
Best
A. Mani
Prof(Miss) A. Mani
CU, ASL, AMS, ISRS, CLC, CMS
HomePage: http://www.logicamani.in
Blog: http://logicamani.blogspot.in/
http://about.me/logicamani
sip:girlprofessor@ekiga.net