Re: Feedback on our evaluation criteria

[Fischers Fritz]

>     > 1. In the above example of GitHub getting grade F for important
>     > site functionality requiring nonfree JavaScript, for example,
>     > we could perhaps link to an email list discussion where we refer
>     > to a particular instance of important functionality breaking
>     > when we don't run a particular nonfree JavaScript.
> 
> I think this is not a wise idea.
> 
> * It would be a lot more work, and we have more important things we
> should attend to.
> 
> * Pointing at those discussions would focus attention on the
> disagreements in the discussions.  That could be counter productive.
> 
> I suggest asking your associate to give suggestions of what sorts
> of answers perse would want to see.  That way we could look at
> this question more clearly.

I think he was hoping for a list of some non-free JavaScript files
so that he (were he running the code-hosting website) could look
through each and fix them.

We cannot be expected to provide a complete list, but I imagine
it is useful to list any that we discovered in the course of the
evaluation.