diff options
author | Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> | 2021-04-21 18:42:20 +0200 |
---|---|---|
committer | Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> | 2021-04-21 18:42:20 +0200 |
commit | 41fb2d4ab8c44d645611ac4e78db56cbaf239595 (patch) | |
tree | 6c1c82ed2a721647ab31eb815c5e276ab1af0b92 /drafts | |
parent | faq: Remove suboptimal "territory" analogy. (diff) |
faq: Publish.
* drafts/faq.md: Move to...
* posts/faq.md: ... here. Remove "DRAFT" and adjust date.
Diffstat (limited to 'drafts')
-rw-r--r-- | drafts/faq.md | 96 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 96 deletions
diff --git a/drafts/faq.md b/drafts/faq.md deleted file mode 100644 index 92e03d8..0000000 --- a/drafts/faq.md +++ /dev/null | |||
@@ -1,96 +0,0 @@ | |||
1 | title: DRAFT Answering frequently asked questions | ||
2 | author: The GNU Assembly | ||
3 | date: 2021-04-20 16:00:00 | ||
4 | --- | ||
5 | |||
6 | **DRAFT** | ||
7 | |||
8 | Following the [Assembly | ||
9 | kick-off](https://web.gnu.tools/en/blog/2021/04/kicking-off-the-gnu-assembly/), | ||
10 | we received lots of questions and read comments that deserved answers. | ||
11 | This post attempts to answer the most common questions. | ||
12 | |||
13 | # Meta-question: why so much confusion around GNU/FSF? | ||
14 | |||
15 | Good question! A common belief is that GNU and the Free Software | ||
16 | Foundation (FSF) are the same thing. This is untrue: GNU is not a | ||
17 | registered non-profit, it’s an informal association among contributors, | ||
18 | separate from the FSF. The FSF is oblivious to technical matters in | ||
19 | GNU. | ||
20 | |||
21 | The FSF supports GNU development primarily in three ways: As legal | ||
22 | guardian (copyright assignments, acting on legal disputes or legal | ||
23 | representation), as [fiscal sponsor](https://www.fsf.org/working-together/fund) | ||
24 | for some GNU packages, and by providing infrastructure like | ||
25 | [Savannah](https://savannah.gnu.org). | ||
26 | |||
27 | # Is this a fork of GNU? | ||
28 | |||
29 | No. The [software in question](/en/software) is not being forked and | ||
30 | the people who write that software remain the same. | ||
31 | |||
32 | What changes is how these people organize themselves beyond their | ||
33 | individual projects—from a | ||
34 | [BDFL](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_dictator_for_life) | ||
35 | top-down model to a [community-oriented, consensus-based | ||
36 | model](https://gnu.tools/en/documents/governance/). | ||
37 | |||
38 | # Is the GNU Assembly an initiative of an existing Free Software organization or is it sponsored by a specific corporation? | ||
39 | |||
40 | No, it’s not! The Assembly was founded by GNU maintainers on personal | ||
41 | title and receives no support, financial or otherwise, from any | ||
42 | organization at this time. At the moment the Assembly uses the | ||
43 | resources of the individuals listed. We will publicly list anybody or | ||
44 | any organization that provides us with sponsorship or resources to be | ||
45 | completely transparent. | ||
46 | |||
47 | # You’re just a minority anyway | ||
48 | |||
49 | That’s not a question, but you’re right: about [30 people](/en/people), | ||
50 | mostly appointed GNU maintainers, endorsed the [Social | ||
51 | Contract](/en/documents/social-contract) so far and may participate in | ||
52 | the Assembly. The number keeps increasing but is still a fraction of | ||
53 | the number of contributors to GNU packages: there are 300+ GNU | ||
54 | maintainers “on file”, though not everyone and [not each project is | ||
55 | active](https://wingolog.org/archives/2020/02/09/state-of-the-gnunion-2020), | ||
56 | [some](https://github.com/gnuradio/gr-governance/blob/main/aoa.md) | ||
57 | [even](https://www.r-project.org/foundation/) | ||
58 | [left](https://lwn.net/Articles/529522/) | ||
59 | [years](https://wingolog.org/archives/2009/12/13/gnu-gnome-and-the-fsf) | ||
60 | [ago](https://discourse.gnome.org/t/relation-between-gimp-and-gnome/2376/8) | ||
61 | for all practical purposes despite being [still | ||
62 | listed](https://www.gnu.org/software)—these projects have their own | ||
63 | governance model and rules, independent of “the rest of GNU”. | ||
64 | |||
65 | Anyway, is being a minority a problem? We don’t think so: we hope this | ||
66 | platform appeals to many GNU contributors and contributors-to-be, but we | ||
67 | can do great things even without on-boarding everyone! | ||
68 | |||
69 | # Why now? Is this really about <current event>? | ||
70 | |||
71 | While current events certainly motivated the decision to make our | ||
72 | efforts more visible, the desire for stronger collaboration | ||
73 | between GNU packages and for communal decision-making as it | ||
74 | pertains to a shared vision has been the subject of many | ||
75 | discussions among GNU maintainers and contributors over the past | ||
76 | decade or so. | ||
77 | |||
78 | # Why didn’t you try to effect change from the inside? | ||
79 | |||
80 | We did! It goes back to [at least ten | ||
81 | years](/en/blog/2021/04/kicking-off-the-gnu-assembly/). The project was | ||
82 | met with enthusiasm from some and hostility from others. That’s fine, | ||
83 | we don’t have to agree! | ||
84 | |||
85 | Unfortunately, GNU would host project-wide discussions on private | ||
86 | mailing lists, so these discussions and soul searching were only known | ||
87 | to “insiders”. The Assembly is determined to have transparent | ||
88 | processes; everything we did, starting with the drafting process of the | ||
89 | Social Contract in 2019–2020, was done publicly. | ||
90 | |||
91 | # Do you support PDP-11 assembly? | ||
92 | |||
93 | Some of us write assembly code (not sure about | ||
94 | [PDP-11](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDP-11) though), but all this is | ||
95 | about [a different kind of | ||
96 | “assembly”](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_assembly). | ||