Re: Debian and Non-Free Services
On 12/09/2019 18:30, Sam Hartman wrote:
Subject: Free Software Needs Free Tools
No Debian contributor should be expected or encouraged, when working
to improve Debian, to use non-free tools. I don't believe that anyone within Debian will have a problem with this
statement.
This includes proprietary web services.
Clearly no issue here either - web services are an instance of a
software application/tool so the above statement holds.
We will ensure this, insofar as it is within Debian's
collective control."Ensure" is perhaps the wrong word here. I submit that "Encourage" may
be a better choice.
Just because you, and I, believe that "No Debian contributor should be
expected or encouraged... ...to use any non-free tools" does not mean
that we should *prevent* them from doing so. The decision to do so
should vest solely with the contributor. *providing* that their doing
so does not force other contributors to use non-free tools.
It would however, IMO, be acceptable to enforce this for Debian's own
tools, and infrastructure. Just not for packages where Debian is not
the 'root upstream'.
For example, Vcs-Git fields in source packages must not refer to
proprietary git code management systems. Non-Debian services are
acceptable here so long as they are principally Free Software.
Your example strikes of forcing people to use an entirely free system
for their development process. If we are to encourage and support
freedom that means that we must also accept that other people have the
freedom to use proprietary git code management systems.
Again if this example is bound within the relm of Debian services, tools
and root packages then IMO this would be acceptable.
We encourage all our upstreams to use Free/Libre tools.
Again I can't see anyone within Debian having a problem with this
statement.
We recognise that metadata in Debian which describes the behaviour
of those outside our community, for example fields which refer to
upstream source management systems, may (in order to be accurate)
still need to refer to proprietary systems.
That is what I am trying to say, and this statement would appear to be
at odds with your example above.
I guess what I am trying to say is for upstream packages distributed
within Debian (the vast majority) we should ensure that contributors to
these packages are able to contribute using exclusively free tools and
software. This does not prohibit the upstream from using proprietary
services, only that their must be a method to contribute without being
forced to use those services.
Where the Debian project *is* the upstream then of cause we should eat
our own dog food and use entirely FLOSS tools.
/Andy
Reply to: