[Freedom-misc] I think the Raptor machines run Trisquel

mason at masonhock.com mason at masonhock.com
Sat Sep 15 23:08:28 CEST 2018

 > On another post it was claimed debian main holds software
 > which you may not use, share, modify and redistribute.

I think you are referring to the discussion that began here,[1] in which  
Calmstorm said that Pocket should be disabled in order to have a  
freedom-respecting system. He was right. Pocket depends on proprietary  
server-side software. However, this does not violate the DFSG, because Debian  
is not directly distributing the non-free software, only the free client  
software that talks to the proprietary sever software. This is also why  
recommending non-free addons and including snap does not violate the DFSG.  
These are good examples of how the DFSG are not good enough to protect the  
freedom of all users. Still, the DFSG are better than the guidelines most  
distros use, and for a user who cares about freedom and is knowledgeable  
enough to avoid things like non-free addons and snap it is possible to use  
Debian freely.

 > Sound strange. I would think getting the required software
 > from debian would be the most efficient solution?

Maybe it would be, if Debian had the same software. It doesn't. Ubuntu has  
more and newer free software than Debian, so it is better for Trisquel to be  
based on Ubuntu.

 > Is it not the non free firmware and
 > software in ubuntu which depends on non free software?

Excluding Ubuntu's multiverse and restricted repositories is just as easy as  
it would be to exclude Debian's non-free and contrib repositories. What Magic  
was asking you is if Ubuntu makes *changes* to packages that Trisquel has to  
revert. I'm not aware of any. Browsing the package helpers,[2] it looks like  
most changes are changing Ubuntu branding to Trisquel branding (this would  
still be necessary with Debian branding) and removing recommendations to  
non-free software (which would still have to be done if Trisquel were based  
on Debian). The only thing that might be easier with Debian is that the  
kernel might not need to be deblobbed, but scripts[3] take care of that, and  
it's not worth giving up the practical advantages of being based on Ubuntu.

 > But if the fsf has the numbers
 > then there is no reason not to give them to me.

Which numbers? The number of Trisquel users? Why would the FSF know that? The  
amount of money the FSF gives to Trisquel? We already know the answer: none.

 > I cannot find any pieces of information about trisquel.

Of course not. The FSF has never spent money to fund Trisquel, so it would  
make no sense for Trisquel to be mentioned. Wouldn't it be weird if financial  
statements listed all the things that money *wasn't* spent on? The list would  
be endless.

 > I have heard fsf has set an amount of time he can
 > spend on trisquel.

His workload at the FSF was preventing him from spending time on Trisquel,  
and once his workload was normalized he had more time to work on Trisquel.[4]  
However, as far as I know he is not paid for the time he spends on Trisquel.  
Where did you hear otherwise?

 > No. Asking people to use and support free software and hardware
 > which can run on free software only also if it is
 > inconvenient and then refusing to spend 2000usd on getting
 > a talos computer and have it tested such that interested
 > people can inform themselves is a wrong decision.

You don't have to use every single piece of free software and hardware that  
exists in order to recommend it. I don't use Trisquel and Parabola and  
Hyperbola and Uruk and Guix and PureOS etc. because I have no need to use  
that many FSDG distros. That doesn't mean I can't recommend that people use  
FSDG distros. As for testing the Talos computer, RYF-endorsement could help  
Raptor if they wanted to use the endorsement to help sell their product. Have  
you asked them if they want this? If they do, they should talk to the FSF and  
send them a unit. If they don't, then the FSF should focus on products by  
vendors for who would find RYF-endorsement to be useful.

 > Who covers the expenses for hosting trisquel? Who covers the expenses  
regarding the trisquel forum?

If you want information about Trisquel's expenses, you should ask Trisquel  
(David is probably the one to contact), not the FSF.

 > If trisquel have few users and fsf cannot spend 2000usd
 > on a computer and because other systems are available
 > then no.

There not very many operating systems that are intended for beginners (which  
is most people in the world). The only ones that come to mind are Windows,  
macOS, Ubuntu, Mint, Manjaro, and Trisquel. The only one of these that is  
free is Trisquel, so without Trisquel it would be very difficult for most  
people to use a free system. Everyone deserves freedom, even if they are  
inexperienced with technology. Funding Trisquel would be a good idea (if the  
FSF could afford it) because it would improve the quality and speed of  
releases, which would benefit current users and help bring in new users.  
Buying a computer that the FSF does not need would not be a good idea at this  
time. If the FSF needs new computers in the future it might then be a good  
idea to consider Talos, but it should not be a priority now.

[2] https://devel.trisquel.info/trisquel/package-helpers/tree/flidas/helpers

More information about the Freedom-misc mailing list