[Solar-general] criterios para soft, lenguajes, distros, etc libres, casi libres etc

Dom Nov 18 23:27:27 CET 2007

Sectarismo? Radicalismo?
No entendo.
Siempre pienso que con una visión más moderna las cosas tiene que ir mejor y
más fáciles...

2007/11/18, Diego Saravia <dsa en unsa.edu.ar>:
>
> http://gnuherds.org/faq#FS_criteria
>
> 5. Which criteria are applied to classify a program, language,
> protocol, specification, software distribution, etc. as Free or
> Non-Free Software?
>
> For a program, read the Free Software definition to know the criteria.
> For development languages, protocols, specifications, etc. the
> meaningful question is whether it is supported by software licensed
> under any of the Free Software Licenses: BSD, GPL, etc. Can you use it
> with Free Software exclusively?
> For software distributions, they must not recommend, promote or grant
> legitimacy to Non-Free Software.
>
> Currently, the types applyed to classify skills are:
> Free Software
> Almost-Free Software, only for software distributions.
> Non-Free Software
>
> For example, applying such criteria to Java:
> The Java technology-skill is tagged as Free Software due to there are
> free software Java compilers.
> However the below Sun Java technologies are tagged as Non-Free
> Software because of the license you have to agree to download them is
> not a Free Software license. Anyhow, most of the Java Sun technologies
> are GPL'd. Sun has made substantial progress towards freeing the JDK
> under the GPL. The IcedTea project is filling in the gaps.
> Java 2 Platform, Standard Edition (J2SE)
> Java 2 Platform, Enterprise Edition (J2EE)
> Java 2 Platform, Micro Edition (J2ME)
> Java Platform, Standard Edition (Java SE)
> Java Platform, Enterprise Edition (Java EE)
> Java Platform, Micro Edition (Java ME)
>
> Applying it to .NET:
> Microsoft .NET is tagged as Non-Free Software.
> Mono .NET is a set of tools under GPL, LGPL and MIT, or dual licenses.
> It is tagged as Free Software.
> .NET is tagged as Non-Free Software because of the Mono tools are not
> 100% complete. Mono does not cover all .NET
> C# is tagged as Free Software due to there are free software C# compilers.
>
> Applying it to some software distributions:
> Debian GNU/Linux is Almost-Free Software because it contains Non-Free
> Software BLOBs in its kernel.
> Debian GNU/Hurd is Free Software because it does not ship anything
> that is Non-Free Software.
> Debian GNU/NetBSD is not classified yet.
> Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is not classified yet.
> Debian is Almost-Free Software. Debian is a general term which refer
> to Debian GNU/Linux and all Debian ports. The Debian project offers
> the download of some Non-Free Software packages from its archives and
> website.
> Ubuntu is Almost-Free Software because it contains Non-Free Software.
> Gobuntu is Almost-Free Software. Although Gobuntu's stated policy is
> to adhere to the Free Software Foundations four freedoms, it presently
> installs Firefox, which encourages installing non-free plugins.
> Gobuntu enables downloading of non-free software packages from its
> archives, and the use of the ubuntu.com domain promotes non-free
> software.
> gNewSense is Free Software because it does not ship anything that is
> Non-Free Software neither work to provide easy access to Non-Free
> Software. A Non-Free Software BLOB not removed from gNewSense is a
> bug. The gNewSense's policy is to delete any non-free software found
> in the Linux kernel or elsewhere in the GNU/Linux system.
> OpenBSD is Almost-Free Software because although it does not ship
> anything that is Non-Free Software it provides for easy installation
> of Non-Free Software through the ports system. Not many packages
> though: Java and a few others.
> FreeBSD and NetBSD are Almost-Free Software because provide for easy
> installation of some Non-Free Software products through the ports
> system. Besides both contain Non-Free Software BLOBs in its kernel
> too.
> Microsoft Windows Vista is tagged as Non-Free Software.
> Note that not all BLOBs are Non-Free Software, because BLOBs can be
> data (not compiled source code) licensed under a Free Software
> license. However, we need to verify that it really is data, because
> the non-free object code is typically dressed up as data.
> --
> Diego Saravia
> Diego.Saravia en gmail.com
> NO FUNCIONA->dsa en unsa.edu.ar
>
> _______________________________________________
> Solar-general mailing list
> Solar-general en lists.ourproject.org
> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/solar-general
>

-- 
-----------------------
Mexico - BsAs
------------ próxima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: /pipermail/solar-general/attachments/20071118/1e7c8909/attachment.htm