1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
|
title: DRAFT Answering frequently asked questions
author: The GNU Assembly
date: 2021-04-20 16:00:00
---
**DRAFT**
Following the [Assembly
kick-off](https://web.gnu.tools/en/blog/2021/04/kicking-off-the-gnu-assembly/),
we received lots of questions and read comments that deserved answers.
This post attempts to answer the most common questions.
# Meta-question: why so much confusion around GNU/FSF?
Good question! A common belief is that GNU and the Free Software
Foundation (FSF) are the same thing. This is untrue: GNU is not a
registered non-profit, it’s an informal association among contributors,
separate from the FSF. The FSF is oblivious to technical matters in
GNU.
The FSF supports GNU development primarily in three ways: As legal
guardian (copyright assignments, acting on legal disputes or legal
representation), as [fiscal sponsor](https://www.fsf.org/working-together/fund)
for some GNU packages, and by providing infrastructure like
[Savannah](https://savannah.gnu.org).
# Is this a fork of GNU?
No. The [software in question](/en/software) is not being forked and
the people who write that software remain the same.
What changes is how these people organize themselves beyond their
individual projects—from a
[BDFL](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_dictator_for_life)
top-down model to a [community-oriented, consensus-based
model](https://gnu.tools/en/documents/governance/).
# Is the GNU Assembly an initiative of an existing Free Software
organization or is it sponsored by a specific corporation?
No, it’s not! The Assembly was founded by GNU maintainers on personal
title and receives no support, financial or otherwise, from any
organization at this time. At the moment the Assembly uses the
resources of the individuals listed. We will publicly list anybody or
any organization that provides us with sponsorship or resources to be
completely transparent.
# You’re just a minority anyway
That’s not a question, but you’re right: about [30 people](/en/people),
mostly appointed GNU maintainers, endorsed the [Social
Contract](/en/documents/social-contract) so far and may participate in
the Assembly. The number keeps increasing but is still a fraction of
the number of contributors to GNU packages: there are 300+ GNU
maintainers “on file”, though not everyone and [not each project is
active](https://wingolog.org/archives/2020/02/09/state-of-the-gnunion-2020),
[some](https://github.com/gnuradio/gr-governance/blob/main/aoa.md)
[even](https://www.r-project.org/foundation/)
[left](https://lwn.net/Articles/529522/)
[years](https://wingolog.org/archives/2009/12/13/gnu-gnome-and-the-fsf)
[ago](https://discourse.gnome.org/t/relation-between-gimp-and-gnome/2376/8)
for all practical purposes despite being [still
listed](https://www.gnu.org/software)—these projects have their own
governance model and rules, independent of “the rest of GNU”. To put it
differently, significant parts of GNU territory is no longer controlled
by the central government, if we dare such an analogy.
Anyways, is being a minority a problem? We don’t think so: we hope this
platform appeals to many GNU contributors and contributors-to-be, but we
can do great things even without on-boarding everyone!
# Why now? Is this really about <current event>?
While current events certainly motivated the decision to make our
efforts more visible, the desire for stronger collaboration
between GNU packages and for communal decision-making as it
pertains to a shared vision has been the subject of many
discussions among GNU maintainers and contributors over the past
decade or so.
# Why didn’t you try to effect change from the inside?
We did! It goes back to [at least ten
years](/en/blog/2021/04/kicking-off-the-gnu-assembly/). The project was
met with enthusiasm from some and hostility from others. That’s fine,
we don’t have to agree!
Unfortunately, GNU would host project-wide discussions on private
mailing lists, so these discussions and soul searching were only known
to “insiders”. The Assembly is determined to have transparent
processes; everything we did, starting with the drafting process of the
Social Contract in 2019–2020, was done publicly.
# Do you support PDP-11 assembly?
Some us write assembly code (not sure about
[PDP-11](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDP-11) though), but all this is
about [a different kind of
“assembly”](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_assembly).
|
