repo-criteria-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org


From: Richard Stallman
Subject: Re: (re-)evaluation of notabug.org
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2021 00:47:52 -0400

[[[ 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. ]]]

  > PASS - A4 - Does not permit non-free licenses
         > the notabug (gogs) software does not have a mechanism to
         > enforce this (no forge that i am aware of does, not even
         > savannah); but the ToS makes it clear that it is provided "for
         > Free/Libre software projects as defined by the Free Software
         > Foundation" - the admin will revoke public access to (or delete)
         > any repo found to be non-free

That is very clearly "not permitting".

                                         - it is not feasible to police
         > private repos in that way; so i would hold this criteria as
         > applicable only to publicly accessible repos

I agree that this is true.  Perhaps we should clarify A4 in this way.

WDPT?

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





reply via email to

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