> Several things:
> - The gobuntu team should be doing the same work for cleaning the kernel
> (ideally making use of the work done by gNewSense).
Yes, but Gobuntu is working together with Ubuntu. What I have been
trying to say is that working together with Ubuntu seems to be more
important for Gobuntu than instant freedom. Instant freedom is a
gNewSense goal. Gobuntu consists about Ubuntu main and universe
components. It is thus a goal of Gobuntu to make sure main and
universe components of Ubuntu contain only free-software.
As a result Gobuntu will become free. How ever they have to take part
in Ubuntu community and drive these things the "correct" way. They may
not go modify original Linux source package from kernel.org only because
it suits the goal of Gobuntu. They will at least have to work with
Ubuntu kernel team. And as I said earlier, it may be preferable to get
these thing right at corresponding upstreams (in this case kernel.org).
> > Gobuntu is the base for Ubuntu and Ubuntu is the base for Gobuntu.
>
> Not entirely sure what this means in this context. Could you expand?
Gobuntu is based on Ubuntu in the sense that Ubuntu existed before
Gobuntu and Gobuntu is now trying to make its own existence possible
by changing the free software components of Ubuntu to suits its needs.
Ubuntu is based on Gobuntu in the sense that it has a free software
core and, if you take out the non-free stuff of Ubuntu you will
essentially get Gobuntu (without the branding). So there is Gobuntu
under the surface of each Ubuntu installation.
> > They share same repositories. This means that Gobuntu repositories
> > contain, say Firefox. Because it is seen by Ubuntu to be Free
>
> Gobuntus stated goal isnt to contain software seen "by Ubuntu to be Free
> software", its to contain software seen by the FSF as free.
But what it really is. Is containing software that is seen by Ubuntu to
be free in the eyes of FSF. For example the following messages (see url
below) states that Firefox will stay. It is unclear whether or not this
is ok with FSF. And it is also unclear whether or not
Canonical/Gobuntu/Ubuntu cares about that.
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/gobuntu-devel/2007-October/000376.html
The message also shows that while Canonical have been working with
separating free and non-free parts of Linux at packaging time. The
source you will get with "apt-get source" will contain the non-free
parts. This applies also to Gobuntu. All this suggests that to be
something the guys at kernel.org should work out.
It should be clear by now that this is not the case for gNewSense as
this is "the thing" they do. Guarantee users freedom as their primary
goal.
> > software. It also means that you really get the original source
> > package with "apt-get source". Free or not. Gobuntu is released
> > along Ubuntu releases.
>
> not sure what you mean about the original source package either - was it
> in reference to Gobuntu or gNewSense?
The original ones. The ones that come from upstreams, say kernel.org.
> > The point of Gobuntu is to drive free-software in Ubuntu, but this is
> > a slow process. Gobuntu people might e.g. try to talk with kernel.org
> > people in order to get the non-free parts out of Linux source release.
>
> it may be accelarated by working with gNewSense's KVF team.
Lets hope so. Has gNewSense KVF team been active in communicating the
matter to the people at kernel.org?
> > It is easy to see that this is slower than simply modifying each tar
> > archive when kernel.org releases them.
>
> Upstream (the Linux project) have shown no intrest in removing blobs
> from Linux. The attitude (last i heard) was 'when all the distros remove
> blobs, so will we' (my paraphrasing, so potentially wrong).
Maybe they care about volume. Ubuntu has lots of users behind it, so I
suppose they might count it to be more than "just another distro". They
seem to be quite rational even, if they are also quite anti-idealist.
> > Gobuntu will never be blessed by RMS because it is a sister product of
> > Ubuntu and there is a risk people might confuse them with each other
> > and fall into using non-free stuff. That might change, if Ubuntu
>
> By having restricted and multiverse enabled by default it /is/
> encouraging users to install non-free software.
Restricted and Multiverse were never enabled by default in Gobuntu.
> Gobuntu also suffers from its ties to ubuntu - bugs that should be fixed
> to fix freedom in Gobuntu arn't because it would require major changes
> to the rest of the family (eg the bug affecting xorg).
Yep. The bugs are fixed in a way that doesn't break everything else
up. Even, if it takes somewhat longer and makes the free software
idealists feel slight burning, while the proper fixes to the issue at
hand are considered. The work on such issues would be greatly improved,
if there were more people trying to figure out a solution that satisfies
everyone.
> > went completely free software, but I don't see that happening as one of
> > the core principles of Ubuntu is to keep free and non-free parts clearly
> > separate instead of simply throwing the non-free stuff into a waste
> > basket.
>
> i didnt know keeping non-free software was a core principle - i thought
> creating a desktop OS was.
Creating a desktop OS is a goal, not a principle. The way Ubuntu works
is that it separates free and non-free parts and leaves the choice to
the user. To make this choice real the basic installation should be
entirely free software. The default installation of Ubuntu does contain
non-free parts ATM to help people migrate into using more free software.
This is a statistical approach were we count the overall work hours
spent by different people using pieces of free software, not the count
of full converts who have hard time finding hardware they can write
their self compiled Linux BIOS on.
> > Short recap. GNewSense will guarantee your freedom today. Gobuntu will
> > (in the long run) hopefully clear out status of free-software in Ubuntu.
>
> And gNewSense wont ensure your long-term freedom?
Of course it will. It did already. If we assume that the current
installation of gNewSense is completely free software. (not sure, if it
is even possible to verify each byte, but lets assume that anyway)
Then you can always use that version. Thus freedom is guaranteed for
ever. You can also use no software at all, in which case your freedom
is guaranteed also.
These claims were highly theoretical and arbitrary proofs regarding the
case at hand. I have no doubts in believing that gNewSense team will
be able to continue working and produce continually freedom guaranteeing
desktop operating systems, that will be hottest hot thing for a free
software idealist.
The point is that Ubuntu has lots of user and it will probably continue
to have lots of users. Thus the potential long term benefit of improving
or clearing out the status of free software in Ubuntu will affect these
users (maybe not visibly, but still). With this approach it is possible
to make free software benefits sneak up on people without them even
noticing. This holds also in the case where these people would not want
to talk about free software and would feel offended, if you tried to
convert them anyway.
> PS. Its gNewSense, not GNewSense
Thanks for pointing that out. Must have seen it starting a sentence. :-)
--Toni
--
Gobuntu-devel mailing list
Gobuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/gobuntu-devel
the present and the future
