Re: [GNU-linux-libre] Perfectionism

[Jean Louis]

It is just a matter of agreement. You do not agree to me and my
viewpoints on "open source", in order to become endorsed
distribution.

In regards to "alternatives", before 2 days I have reviewed your
website. And I found pointers on first page to PureOS, it does not
matter. You changed it, or somebody else, and now you claim it was
never there. I mean this kind of conversation is childish. I don't
mind what you sell, what you do, and how you change the pages, but I
do appreciate integrity, when you change it, that you say you changed
it, and not to claim that it was not there before 2 days.

The website is whole, integrated into one, Puri.sm and PureOS, I don't
mind, but I am pointing it out.

On that website you have "alternative" to proprietary:
https://puri.sm/faq/how-to-find-alternative-programs-to-common-windows-or-mac-software/

https://puri.sm/faq/ "How to find alternative programs common to
Windows or Mac?"

https://puri.sm/posts/tag/floss-apps/ "Alternative free and open
source Software", where on your website is mentioned "So we wanted to
make a simple table that shows common branded proprietary software and
what free and open source software replaces or is an acceptable
alternative to it."

The thread is about complying to Free System Distribution Guidelines,
it does not apply only to software, but to developers promoting such
distribution. Do you see the point? It is about teaching others of
free software. Not only providing software.

Don't think I am against your type of promotion, do what you want. Use
terminology as you wish.

If you ask for comments, don't expect silence. I am comparing your
website where PureOS is distributed from to the Free System
Distribution Guidelines. No emotions there, it should be incentive to
improve. 

I just don't see myself fit on such website, while I see myself fit
into each of the current free distributions, and even donated some
small money there.

And I recommend you read on this page who to contact to get endorsed:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html
it is written at bottom to whom to write. Did you write there?

Jean Louis

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 03:09:37PM -0500, Jeff F. wrote:
> Jean Louis,
> 
> You keep assuming we don't understand the terminology. We know full
> well the distinction between Free/Libre/Open-Source/Gratis/etc. Most of
> us have been involved in the Free Software community for over 1-2
> decades.
> 
> The thing is, if we were trying to convince only extremely hardcore
> people, there would be no need for the PureOS web page at all, it would
> be preaching to the choir. I expect they wouldn't even be running
> PureOS anyway because they're so well-versed and accustomed to their
> own systems. Instead, the point of this OS's existence is to attract
> new users to the Free Software movement with an OS that appeals to them
> on a technical and usability standpoint while respecting their freedom.
> You don't do that by being un-understandable by anyone but the geekiest
> of geeks. If you are so restrictive, you will remain a small stagnant
> pond. Nobody benefits from that.
> 
> Nowhere in there is "open source" mentioned alone and carelessly like
> you depict it to be. It's always "Free software" or "Free/Libre and
> Open-Source". There is no issue with that. There is not even a mention
> of the verboten word "alternatives" in there, unlike what you claim.
> And when you pointed to a Google cached page, it's an ancient version
> of the old website, multiple weeks old (with multi-months old contents,
> actually), hardly relevant to this discussion; and websites are not
> meant to be frozen in time for all eternity.
> 
> And again, this whole thread is about the software distribution. Is it
> Free? Yes. Does it promote user freedom? Yes. Then it is ready to move
> forward in the process of being recognized as such. That's it.
>