[GNUz] How does GLU/GNUz differ from CLUG?

[Don Gould]

Hi Tim,

How do you use and promote software in the community?

Cheers Don

Timothy Musson wrote:
> Okay, here's the post I promised over on the CLUG mailing list :^)
>=20
> I'm not so much interested in discussing binary blobs, as figuring out
> what GLU/GNUz is all about... and that kind of discussion belongs on
> _this_ list. So here goes.
>=20
>=20
> Let's start with the CLUG.
>=20
> The CLUG isn't a Free Software user group. Most of the people there
> don't have ethical problems promoting and supporting proprietary
> software, even when Free alternatives exist. Now, I'm not complaining -
> I happen to think that CLUG is a fantastic resource. I'm just saying
> that CLUG has no interest in Free Software philosophy.
>=20
>=20
> Now to GLU/GNUz.
>=20
> Unless I'm mistaken, the GNUz list got started as a place for people
> interested in Free Software (regardless of Operating System) and the
> philosophy behind it.  Actually, I vaguely remember Jim saying the list
> would become whatever we made it. There was no "mission statement" or
> anything like that. So we're not _necessarily_ a Free Software
> interest/support group ;^)
>=20
> But assuming we are a Free Software group, rather than an alternative
> CLUG:
>=20
> How can it be appropriate for us to recommend, distribute and support
> proprietary software in any way?
>=20
> We recommend and support Ubuntu[1], which includes non-Free software.
> We help folks install binary-only drivers (wireless, video, ...)
> We help folks set up win32 codecs, flash, etc.
>=20
> If we can find excuses to do those things, what differentiates us from
> the CLUG?
>=20
> Instead, why don't we...
>=20
> Consider Free alternatives to Ubuntu (gNewSense, Fedora, others?)
> Help folks select and track-down decent hardware.
> Come up with a constitution, so that I'm no longer confused :^)
>=20
>=20
> [1] Rik, there's no doubt that Ubuntu includes non-Free software, and
>     intends to include more in future. To "opt out", you need to pick a
>     GNU/Linux distro that does gymnastics to compile a truly free Linux
>     kernel. Ubuntu doesn't do that.
>=20
>    From RMS:
>    http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/linux-gnu-freedom.html
>=20
>    "The Linux sources themselves have an even more serious problem
>     with non-free software: they actually contain some. Quite a few
>     device drivers contain series of numbers that represent firmware
>     programs to be installed in the device. These programs are not
>     free software."
>=20
>    "Linux, the kernel, is often thought of as the flagship of free
>     software, yet its current version is partially non-free. How did
>     this happen? This problem, like the decision to use Bitkeeper,
>     reflects the attitude of the original developer of Linux, a person
>     who thinks that =E2=80=9Ctechnically better=E2=80=9D is more import=
ant than
>     freedom."
>=20
>    From Mark Shuttleworth, about Ubuntu:
>    http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/95
>=20
>    "During the discussion, we re-affirmed the Ubuntu policy of includin=
g
>     proprietary drivers where these are required to enable essential
>     hardware functionality. [...] We have always shipped those, and
>     intend to continue to do so."
>=20
>=20
> Regards,
>=20
> Tim

--=20
Don Gould
www.thinkdesignprint.co.nz - www.tcn.bowenvale.co.nz -=20
www.bowenvale.co.nz - www.hearingbooks.co.nz - www.crra.org.nz -=20
www.justhelicopters.co.nz - www.buxtonsquare.co.nz -=20
skype:ThinkDesignPrint?add - Good ideas:  www.solarking.co.nz