On 26.08.2016 05:16, Christopher Waid wrote:
On 2016-08-25 06:26 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
On 25.08.2016 15:47, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
On 25.08.2016 15:25, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
This issue of "you said it is 'libre' but I prove it's not", and
even
the issue regarding the older publication on ThinkPenguin's site,
can be
easily solved by changing terms/words accordingly there. There's no
need
to make everyone mad at each other.
It's not just about terminology. It's about deliberately
misinforming
the people to back your project because it's been libre hardware and
libre software "right from the beginning". And also misinforming
people
to think it's OK for their freedom to buy laptops with proprietary
BIOS
rather than with Libreboot.
Richard Stallman has just confirmed me that FSF has not received the
PCB
design sources along with the Libre Tea Computer Card.
I hope that now everyone understands that this EOMA68 board is *not*
libre hardware as claimed.
That doesn't make it "*not* libre hardware" as far as the FSF is
concerned. The FSF *DOES NOT* require the PCB designs for RYF.
RYF doesn't certify free hardware design. But "libre hardware" means
free-design hardware and that is explained in this essay you should
read
sometimes:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-hardware-designs.html
Using the definition there, of course EOMA68 computer is *not* "libre
hardware".