Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/12/15/what-debian-does.html

I woke up early this morning, and those of you live above 45° parallel
north or so are used to the “I’m wide awake but it’s still dark as
night” feeling in the winter. I usually don’t turn on the lights,
wander into my office, and just bring my computer out of hibernate; that
takes a bit as my 100% Free-Software-only computer is old and slow, so I
usually go to make coffee while that happens.

As I came back in my office this morning I was a bit struck by both
displays with the huge Debian screen lock image, and it got me thinking of
how Debian has been my companion for so many years.
I spoke about this at
DebConf
15 a bit, and wrote
about a similar concept years before. I realize that it’s been almost
nine years that I’ve been thinking rather deeply about my personal
relationship with Debian and why it matters.

This morning, I was inspired to post this because, echoing back to my
thoughts at my DebConf 15 talk, that I can’t actually do the work I do
without Debian. I thought this morning about a few simple things that
Debian gets done for me that are essential:

• Licensing assurance. I really can trust that Debian will not put
  something in main that fails to respect my software
  freedom. Given my lifelong work on Free Software licensing, yes, I can
  vet a codebase to search for hidden proprietary software among the Free,
  but it’s so convenient to have another group of people gladly do that job
  for me and other users.
• Curated and configured software, with connection to the
  expert. Some days it seems none of the new generation of
  developers are a fan of software packaging anymore. Anytime you want to
  run something new these days, someone is trying to convince you to
  download some docker image or something like that. It’s not that I don’t
  see the value in that, but what I usually want is that software I just
  read about installed on my machine as quickly as possible. Debian’s
  repository is huge, and the setup of Debian as a project allows for each
  package maintainer to work in relative independence to make the software
  of their interest run correctly as part of the whole. For the user, that
  means when I hear about some interesting software, Debian immediately
  connects me, via apt, with the individual expert who knows about that
  software and my operating system /
  distribution both. Apt, Debian’s Bug Tracker, etc. are actually a
  rudimentary but very usable form of a social networking that allows me to
  find the person who did the job to get this software actually working on
  my system. That’s a professional community that’s amazing
• Stability. It’s rather amusing, All the Debian
  developers I know run testing on their laptop and stable only on their
  servers. I run stable on my laptop. I have a hectic schedule and always
  lots of work to do that, sadly, does not usually include “making my
  personal infrastructure setup do new things”. While I enjoy that
  sort of work, it’s a rabbit hole that I rarely have the luxury to enter.
  Running Debian stable on my laptop means I am (almost) never surprised by
  any behavior of my equipment. In the last nine years, if my computer does
  something weird, it’s basically always a hardware problem.

Sure, maybe you can get the last two mostly with other
distributions, but I don’t think you can get the first one anywhere
better. Anyway, I’ve gotta get to work for the day, but those of you out
there that make Debian happen, perhaps you’ll see a bit of a thank you from
me today. While I’ve thanked you all before, I think that no one does it
enough.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/12/15/what-debian-does.html

I woke up early this morning, and those of you live above 45° parallel
north or so are used to the “I’m wide awake but it’s still dark as
night” feeling in the winter. I usually don’t turn on the lights,
wander into my office, and just bring my computer out of hibernate; that
takes a bit as my 100% Free-Software-only computer is old and slow, so I
usually go to make coffee while that happens.

As I came back in my office this morning I was a bit struck by both
displays with the huge Debian screen lock image, and it got me thinking of
how Debian has been my companion for so many years.
I spoke about this at
DebConf
15 a bit, and wrote
about a similar concept years before. I realize that it’s been almost
nine years that I’ve been thinking rather deeply about my personal
relationship with Debian and why it matters.

This morning, I was inspired to post this because, echoing back to my
thoughts at my DebConf 15 talk, that I can’t actually do the work I do
without Debian. I thought this morning about a few simple things that
Debian gets done for me that are essential:

• Licensing assurance. I really can trust that Debian will not put
  something in main that fails to respect my software
  freedom. Given my lifelong work on Free Software licensing, yes, I can
  vet a codebase to search for hidden proprietary software among the Free,
  but it’s so convenient to have another group of people gladly do that job
  for me and other users.
• Curated and configured software, with connection to the
  expert. Some days it seems none of the new generation of
  developers are a fan of software packaging anymore. Anytime you want to
  run something new these days, someone is trying to convince you to
  download some docker image or something like that. It’s not that I don’t
  see the value in that, but what I usually want is that software I just
  read about installed on my machine as quickly as possible. Debian’s
  repository is huge, and the setup of Debian as a project allows for each
  package maintainer to work in relative independence to make the software
  of their interest run correctly as part of the whole. For the user, that
  means when I hear about some interesting software, Debian immediately
  connects me, via apt, with the individual expert who knows about that
  software and my operating system /
  distribution both. Apt, Debian’s Bug Tracker, etc. are actually a
  rudimentary but very usable form of a social networking that allows me to
  find the person who did the job to get this software actually working on
  my system. That’s a professional community that’s amazing
• Stability. It’s rather amusing, All the Debian
  developers I know run testing on their laptop and stable only on their
  servers. I run stable on my laptop. I have a hectic schedule and always
  lots of work to do that, sadly, does not usually include “making my
  personal infrastructure setup do new things”. While I enjoy that
  sort of work, it’s a rabbit hole that I rarely have the luxury to enter.
  Running Debian stable on my laptop means I am (almost) never surprised by
  any behavior of my equipment. In the last nine years, if my computer does
  something weird, it’s basically always a hardware problem.

Sure, maybe you can get the last two mostly with other
distributions, but I don’t think you can get the first one anywhere
better. Anyway, I’ve gotta get to work for the day, but those of you out
there that make Debian happen, perhaps you’ll see a bit of a thank you from
me today. While I’ve thanked you all before, I think that no one does it
enough.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/12/15/what-debian-does.html

I woke up early this morning, and those of you live above 45° parallel
north or so are used to the “I’m wide awake but it’s still dark as
night” feeling in the winter. I usually don’t turn on the lights,
wander into my office, and just bring my computer out of hibernate; that
takes a bit as my 100% Free-Software-only computer is old and slow, so I
usually go to make coffee while that happens.

As I came back in my office this morning I was a bit struck by both
displays with the huge Debian screen lock image, and it got me thinking of
how Debian has been my companion for so many years.
I spoke about this at
DebConf
15 a bit, and wrote
about a similar concept years before. I realize that it’s been almost
nine years that I’ve been thinking rather deeply about my personal
relationship with Debian and why it matters.

This morning, I was inspired to post this because, echoing back to my
thoughts at my DebConf 15 talk, that I can’t actually do the work I do
without Debian. I thought this morning about a few simple things that
Debian gets done for me that are essential:

• Licensing assurance. I really can trust that Debian will not put
  something in main that fails to respect my software
  freedom. Given my lifelong work on Free Software licensing, yes, I can
  vet a codebase to search for hidden proprietary software among the Free,
  but it’s so convenient to have another group of people gladly do that job
  for me and other users.
• Curated and configured software, with connection to the
  expert. Some days it seems none of the new generation of
  developers are a fan of software packaging anymore. Anytime you want to
  run something new these days, someone is trying to convince you to
  download some docker image or something like that. It’s not that I don’t
  see the value in that, but what I usually want is that software I just
  read about installed on my machine as quickly as possible. Debian’s
  repository is huge, and the setup of Debian as a project allows for each
  package maintainer to work in relative independence to make the software
  of their interest run correctly as part of the whole. For the user, that
  means when I hear about some interesting software, Debian immediately
  connects me, via apt, with the individual expert who knows about that
  software and my operating system /
  distribution both. Apt, Debian’s Bug Tracker, etc. are actually a
  rudimentary but very usable form of a social networking that allows me to
  find the person who did the job to get this software actually working on
  my system. That’s a professional community that’s amazing
• Stability. It’s rather amusing, All the Debian
  developers I know run testing on their laptop and stable only on their
  servers. I run stable on my laptop. I have a hectic schedule and always
  lots of work to do that, sadly, does not usually include “making my
  personal infrastructure setup do new things”. While I enjoy that
  sort of work, it’s a rabbit hole that I rarely have the luxury to enter.
  Running Debian stable on my laptop means I am (almost) never surprised by
  any behavior of my equipment. In the last nine years, if my computer does
  something weird, it’s basically always a hardware problem.

Sure, maybe you can get the last two mostly with other
distributions, but I don’t think you can get the first one anywhere
better. Anyway, I’ve gotta get to work for the day, but those of you out
there that make Debian happen, perhaps you’ll see a bit of a thank you from
me today. While I’ve thanked you all before, I think that no one does it
enough.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/12/15/what-debian-does.html

I woke up early this morning, and those of you live above 45° parallel
north or so are used to the “I’m wide awake but it’s still dark as
night” feeling in the winter. I usually don’t turn on the lights,
wander into my office, and just bring my computer out of hibernate; that
takes a bit as my 100% Free-Software-only computer is old and slow, so I
usually go to make coffee while that happens.

As I came back in my office this morning I was a bit struck by both
displays with the huge Debian screen lock image, and it got me thinking of
how Debian has been my companion for so many years.
I spoke about this at
DebConf
15 a bit, and wrote
about a similar concept years before. I realize that it’s been almost
nine years that I’ve been thinking rather deeply about my personal
relationship with Debian and why it matters.

This morning, I was inspired to post this because, echoing back to my
thoughts at my DebConf 15 talk, that I can’t actually do the work I do
without Debian. I thought this morning about a few simple things that
Debian gets done for me that are essential:

• Licensing assurance. I really can trust that Debian will not put
  something in main that fails to respect my software
  freedom. Given my lifelong work on Free Software licensing, yes, I can
  vet a codebase to search for hidden proprietary software among the Free,
  but it’s so convenient to have another group of people gladly do that job
  for me and other users.
• Curated and configured software, with connection to the
  expert. Some days it seems none of the new generation of
  developers are a fan of software packaging anymore. Anytime you want to
  run something new these days, someone is trying to convince you to
  download some docker image or something like that. It’s not that I don’t
  see the value in that, but what I usually want is that software I just
  read about installed on my machine as quickly as possible. Debian’s
  repository is huge, and the setup of Debian as a project allows for each
  package maintainer to work in relative independence to make the software
  of their interest run correctly as part of the whole. For the user, that
  means when I hear about some interesting software, Debian immediately
  connects me, via apt, with the individual expert who knows about that
  software and my operating system /
  distribution both. Apt, Debian’s Bug Tracker, etc. are actually a
  rudimentary but very usable form of a social networking that allows me to
  find the person who did the job to get this software actually working on
  my system. That’s a professional community that’s amazing
• Stability. It’s rather amusing, All the Debian
  developers I know run testing on their laptop and stable only on their
  servers. I run stable on my laptop. I have a hectic schedule and always
  lots of work to do that, sadly, does not usually include “making my
  personal infrastructure setup do new things”. While I enjoy that
  sort of work, it’s a rabbit hole that I rarely have the luxury to enter.
  Running Debian stable on my laptop means I am (almost) never surprised by
  any behavior of my equipment. In the last nine years, if my computer does
  something weird, it’s basically always a hardware problem.

Sure, maybe you can get the last two mostly with other
distributions, but I don’t think you can get the first one anywhere
better. Anyway, I’ve gotta get to work for the day, but those of you out
there that make Debian happen, perhaps you’ll see a bit of a thank you from
me today. While I’ve thanked you all before, I think that no one does it
enough.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/12/15/what-debian-does.html

I woke up early this morning, and those of you live above 45° parallel
north or so are used to the “I’m wide awake but it’s still dark as
night” feeling in the winter. I usually don’t turn on the lights,
wander into my office, and just bring my computer out of hibernate; that
takes a bit as my 100% Free-Software-only computer is old and slow, so I
usually go to make coffee while that happens.

As I came back in my office this morning I was a bit struck by both
displays with the huge Debian screen lock image, and it got me thinking of
how Debian has been my companion for so many years.
I spoke about this at
DebConf
15 a bit, and wrote
about a similar concept years before. I realize that it’s been almost
nine years that I’ve been thinking rather deeply about my personal
relationship with Debian and why it matters.

This morning, I was inspired to post this because, echoing back to my
thoughts at my DebConf 15 talk, that I can’t actually do the work I do
without Debian. I thought this morning about a few simple things that
Debian gets done for me that are essential:

• Licensing assurance. I really can trust that Debian will not put
  something in main that fails to respect my software
  freedom. Given my lifelong work on Free Software licensing, yes, I can
  vet a codebase to search for hidden proprietary software among the Free,
  but it’s so convenient to have another group of people gladly do that job
  for me and other users.
• Curated and configured software, with connection to the
  expert. Some days it seems none of the new generation of
  developers are a fan of software packaging anymore. Anytime you want to
  run something new these days, someone is trying to convince you to
  download some docker image or something like that. It’s not that I don’t
  see the value in that, but what I usually want is that software I just
  read about installed on my machine as quickly as possible. Debian’s
  repository is huge, and the setup of Debian as a project allows for each
  package maintainer to work in relative independence to make the software
  of their interest run correctly as part of the whole. For the user, that
  means when I hear about some interesting software, Debian immediately
  connects me, via apt, with the individual expert who knows about that
  software and my operating system /
  distribution both. Apt, Debian’s Bug Tracker, etc. are actually a
  rudimentary but very usable form of a social networking that allows me to
  find the person who did the job to get this software actually working on
  my system. That’s a professional community that’s amazing
• Stability. It’s rather amusing, All the Debian
  developers I know run testing on their laptop and stable only on their
  servers. I run stable on my laptop. I have a hectic schedule and always
  lots of work to do that, sadly, does not usually include “making my
  personal infrastructure setup do new things”. While I enjoy that
  sort of work, it’s a rabbit hole that I rarely have the luxury to enter.
  Running Debian stable on my laptop means I am (almost) never surprised by
  any behavior of my equipment. In the last nine years, if my computer does
  something weird, it’s basically always a hardware problem.

Sure, maybe you can get the last two mostly with other
distributions, but I don’t think you can get the first one anywhere
better. Anyway, I’ve gotta get to work for the day, but those of you out
there that make Debian happen, perhaps you’ll see a bit of a thank you from
me today. While I’ve thanked you all before, I think that no one does it
enough.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/12/15/what-debian-does.html

I woke up early this morning, and those of you live above 45° parallel
north or so are used to the “I’m wide awake but it’s still dark as
night” feeling in the winter. I usually don’t turn on the lights,
wander into my office, and just bring my computer out of hibernate; that
takes a bit as my 100% Free-Software-only computer is old and slow, so I
usually go to make coffee while that happens.

As I came back in my office this morning I was a bit struck by both
displays with the huge Debian screen lock image, and it got me thinking of
how Debian has been my companion for so many years.
I spoke about this at
DebConf
15 a bit, and wrote
about a similar concept years before. I realize that it’s been almost
nine years that I’ve been thinking rather deeply about my personal
relationship with Debian and why it matters.

This morning, I was inspired to post this because, echoing back to my
thoughts at my DebConf 15 talk, that I can’t actually do the work I do
without Debian. I thought this morning about a few simple things that
Debian gets done for me that are essential:

• Licensing assurance. I really can trust that Debian will not put
  something in main that fails to respect my software
  freedom. Given my lifelong work on Free Software licensing, yes, I can
  vet a codebase to search for hidden proprietary software among the Free,
  but it’s so convenient to have another group of people gladly do that job
  for me and other users.
• Curated and configured software, with connection to the
  expert. Some days it seems none of the new generation of
  developers are a fan of software packaging anymore. Anytime you want to
  run something new these days, someone is trying to convince you to
  download some docker image or something like that. It’s not that I don’t
  see the value in that, but what I usually want is that software I just
  read about installed on my machine as quickly as possible. Debian’s
  repository is huge, and the setup of Debian as a project allows for each
  package maintainer to work in relative independence to make the software
  of their interest run correctly as part of the whole. For the user, that
  means when I hear about some interesting software, Debian immediately
  connects me, via apt, with the individual expert who knows about that
  software and my operating system /
  distribution both. Apt, Debian’s Bug Tracker, etc. are actually a
  rudimentary but very usable form of a social networking that allows me to
  find the person who did the job to get this software actually working on
  my system. That’s a professional community that’s amazing
• Stability. It’s rather amusing, All the Debian
  developers I know run testing on their laptop and stable only on their
  servers. I run stable on my laptop. I have a hectic schedule and always
  lots of work to do that, sadly, does not usually include “making my
  personal infrastructure setup do new things”. While I enjoy that
  sort of work, it’s a rabbit hole that I rarely have the luxury to enter.
  Running Debian stable on my laptop means I am (almost) never surprised by
  any behavior of my equipment. In the last nine years, if my computer does
  something weird, it’s basically always a hardware problem.

Sure, maybe you can get the last two mostly with other
distributions, but I don’t think you can get the first one anywhere
better. Anyway, I’ve gotta get to work for the day, but those of you out
there that make Debian happen, perhaps you’ll see a bit of a thank you from
me today. While I’ve thanked you all before, I think that no one does it
enough.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/12/15/what-debian-does.html

I woke up early this morning, and those of you live above 45° parallel
north or so are used to the “I’m wide awake but it’s still dark as
night” feeling in the winter. I usually don’t turn on the lights,
wander into my office, and just bring my computer out of hibernate; that
takes a bit as my 100% Free-Software-only computer is old and slow, so I
usually go to make coffee while that happens.

As I came back in my office this morning I was a bit struck by both
displays with the huge Debian screen lock image, and it got me thinking of
how Debian has been my companion for so many years.
I spoke about this at
DebConf
15 a bit, and wrote
about a similar concept years before. I realize that it’s been almost
nine years that I’ve been thinking rather deeply about my personal
relationship with Debian and why it matters.

This morning, I was inspired to post this because, echoing back to my
thoughts at my DebConf 15 talk, that I can’t actually do the work I do
without Debian. I thought this morning about a few simple things that
Debian gets done for me that are essential:

• Licensing assurance. I really can trust that Debian will not put
  something in main that fails to respect my software
  freedom. Given my lifelong work on Free Software licensing, yes, I can
  vet a codebase to search for hidden proprietary software among the Free,
  but it’s so convenient to have another group of people gladly do that job
  for me and other users.
• Curated and configured software, with connection to the
  expert. Some days it seems none of the new generation of
  developers are a fan of software packaging anymore. Anytime you want to
  run something new these days, someone is trying to convince you to
  download some docker image or something like that. It’s not that I don’t
  see the value in that, but what I usually want is that software I just
  read about installed on my machine as quickly as possible. Debian’s
  repository is huge, and the setup of Debian as a project allows for each
  package maintainer to work in relative independence to make the software
  of their interest run correctly as part of the whole. For the user, that
  means when I hear about some interesting software, Debian immediately
  connects me, via apt, with the individual expert who knows about that
  software and my operating system /
  distribution both. Apt, Debian’s Bug Tracker, etc. are actually a
  rudimentary but very usable form of a social networking that allows me to
  find the person who did the job to get this software actually working on
  my system. That’s a professional community that’s amazing
• Stability. It’s rather amusing, All the Debian
  developers I know run testing on their laptop and stable only on their
  servers. I run stable on my laptop. I have a hectic schedule and always
  lots of work to do that, sadly, does not usually include “making my
  personal infrastructure setup do new things”. While I enjoy that
  sort of work, it’s a rabbit hole that I rarely have the luxury to enter.
  Running Debian stable on my laptop means I am (almost) never surprised by
  any behavior of my equipment. In the last nine years, if my computer does
  something weird, it’s basically always a hardware problem.

Sure, maybe you can get the last two mostly with other
distributions, but I don’t think you can get the first one anywhere
better. Anyway, I’ve gotta get to work for the day, but those of you out
there that make Debian happen, perhaps you’ll see a bit of a thank you from
me today. While I’ve thanked you all before, I think that no one does it
enough.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/12/15/what-debian-does.html

I woke up early this morning, and those of you live above 45° parallel
north or so are used to the “I’m wide awake but it’s still dark as
night” feeling in the winter. I usually don’t turn on the lights,
wander into my office, and just bring my computer out of hibernate; that
takes a bit as my 100% Free-Software-only computer is old and slow, so I
usually go to make coffee while that happens.

As I came back in my office this morning I was a bit struck by both
displays with the huge Debian screen lock image, and it got me thinking of
how Debian has been my companion for so many years.
I spoke about this at
DebConf
15 a bit, and wrote
about a similar concept years before. I realize that it’s been almost
nine years that I’ve been thinking rather deeply about my personal
relationship with Debian and why it matters.

This morning, I was inspired to post this because, echoing back to my
thoughts at my DebConf 15 talk, that I can’t actually do the work I do
without Debian. I thought this morning about a few simple things that
Debian gets done for me that are essential:

• Licensing assurance. I really can trust that Debian will not put
  something in main that fails to respect my software
  freedom. Given my lifelong work on Free Software licensing, yes, I can
  vet a codebase to search for hidden proprietary software among the Free,
  but it’s so convenient to have another group of people gladly do that job
  for me and other users.
• Curated and configured software, with connection to the
  expert. Some days it seems none of the new generation of
  developers are a fan of software packaging anymore. Anytime you want to
  run something new these days, someone is trying to convince you to
  download some docker image or something like that. It’s not that I don’t
  see the value in that, but what I usually want is that software I just
  read about installed on my machine as quickly as possible. Debian’s
  repository is huge, and the setup of Debian as a project allows for each
  package maintainer to work in relative independence to make the software
  of their interest run correctly as part of the whole. For the user, that
  means when I hear about some interesting software, Debian immediately
  connects me, via apt, with the individual expert who knows about that
  software and my operating system /
  distribution both. Apt, Debian’s Bug Tracker, etc. are actually a
  rudimentary but very usable form of a social networking that allows me to
  find the person who did the job to get this software actually working on
  my system. That’s a professional community that’s amazing
• Stability. It’s rather amusing, All the Debian
  developers I know run testing on their laptop and stable only on their
  servers. I run stable on my laptop. I have a hectic schedule and always
  lots of work to do that, sadly, does not usually include “making my
  personal infrastructure setup do new things”. While I enjoy that
  sort of work, it’s a rabbit hole that I rarely have the luxury to enter.
  Running Debian stable on my laptop means I am (almost) never surprised by
  any behavior of my equipment. In the last nine years, if my computer does
  something weird, it’s basically always a hardware problem.

Sure, maybe you can get the last two mostly with other
distributions, but I don’t think you can get the first one anywhere
better. Anyway, I’ve gotta get to work for the day, but those of you out
there that make Debian happen, perhaps you’ll see a bit of a thank you from
me today. While I’ve thanked you all before, I think that no one does it
enough.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/12/15/what-debian-does.html

I woke up early this morning, and those of you live above 45° parallel
north or so are used to the “I’m wide awake but it’s still dark as
night” feeling in the winter. I usually don’t turn on the lights,
wander into my office, and just bring my computer out of hibernate; that
takes a bit as my 100% Free-Software-only computer is old and slow, so I
usually go to make coffee while that happens.

As I came back in my office this morning I was a bit struck by both
displays with the huge Debian screen lock image, and it got me thinking of
how Debian has been my companion for so many years.
I spoke about this at
DebConf
15 a bit, and wrote
about a similar concept years before. I realize that it’s been almost
nine years that I’ve been thinking rather deeply about my personal
relationship with Debian and why it matters.

This morning, I was inspired to post this because, echoing back to my
thoughts at my DebConf 15 talk, that I can’t actually do the work I do
without Debian. I thought this morning about a few simple things that
Debian gets done for me that are essential:

• Licensing assurance. I really can trust that Debian will not put
  something in main that fails to respect my software
  freedom. Given my lifelong work on Free Software licensing, yes, I can
  vet a codebase to search for hidden proprietary software among the Free,
  but it’s so convenient to have another group of people gladly do that job
  for me and other users.
• Curated and configured software, with connection to the
  expert. Some days it seems none of the new generation of
  developers are a fan of software packaging anymore. Anytime you want to
  run something new these days, someone is trying to convince you to
  download some docker image or something like that. It’s not that I don’t
  see the value in that, but what I usually want is that software I just
  read about installed on my machine as quickly as possible. Debian’s
  repository is huge, and the setup of Debian as a project allows for each
  package maintainer to work in relative independence to make the software
  of their interest run correctly as part of the whole. For the user, that
  means when I hear about some interesting software, Debian immediately
  connects me, via apt, with the individual expert who knows about that
  software and my operating system /
  distribution both. Apt, Debian’s Bug Tracker, etc. are actually a
  rudimentary but very usable form of a social networking that allows me to
  find the person who did the job to get this software actually working on
  my system. That’s a professional community that’s amazing
• Stability. It’s rather amusing, All the Debian
  developers I know run testing on their laptop and stable only on their
  servers. I run stable on my laptop. I have a hectic schedule and always
  lots of work to do that, sadly, does not usually include “making my
  personal infrastructure setup do new things”. While I enjoy that
  sort of work, it’s a rabbit hole that I rarely have the luxury to enter.
  Running Debian stable on my laptop means I am (almost) never surprised by
  any behavior of my equipment. In the last nine years, if my computer does
  something weird, it’s basically always a hardware problem.

Sure, maybe you can get the last two mostly with other
distributions, but I don’t think you can get the first one anywhere
better. Anyway, I’ve gotta get to work for the day, but those of you out
there that make Debian happen, perhaps you’ll see a bit of a thank you from
me today. While I’ve thanked you all before, I think that no one does it
enough.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/12/15/what-debian-does.html

I woke up early this morning, and those of you live above 45° parallel
north or so are used to the “I’m wide awake but it’s still dark as
night” feeling in the winter. I usually don’t turn on the lights,
wander into my office, and just bring my computer out of hibernate; that
takes a bit as my 100% Free-Software-only computer is old and slow, so I
usually go to make coffee while that happens.

As I came back in my office this morning I was a bit struck by both
displays with the huge Debian screen lock image, and it got me thinking of
how Debian has been my companion for so many years.
I spoke about this at
DebConf
15 a bit, and wrote
about a similar concept years before. I realize that it’s been almost
nine years that I’ve been thinking rather deeply about my personal
relationship with Debian and why it matters.

This morning, I was inspired to post this because, echoing back to my
thoughts at my DebConf 15 talk, that I can’t actually do the work I do
without Debian. I thought this morning about a few simple things that
Debian gets done for me that are essential:

• Licensing assurance. I really can trust that Debian will not put
  something in main that fails to respect my software
  freedom. Given my lifelong work on Free Software licensing, yes, I can
  vet a codebase to search for hidden proprietary software among the Free,
  but it’s so convenient to have another group of people gladly do that job
  for me and other users.
• Curated and configured software, with connection to the
  expert. Some days it seems none of the new generation of
  developers are a fan of software packaging anymore. Anytime you want to
  run something new these days, someone is trying to convince you to
  download some docker image or something like that. It’s not that I don’t
  see the value in that, but what I usually want is that software I just
  read about installed on my machine as quickly as possible. Debian’s
  repository is huge, and the setup of Debian as a project allows for each
  package maintainer to work in relative independence to make the software
  of their interest run correctly as part of the whole. For the user, that
  means when I hear about some interesting software, Debian immediately
  connects me, via apt, with the individual expert who knows about that
  software and my operating system /
  distribution both. Apt, Debian’s Bug Tracker, etc. are actually a
  rudimentary but very usable form of a social networking that allows me to
  find the person who did the job to get this software actually working on
  my system. That’s a professional community that’s amazing
• Stability. It’s rather amusing, All the Debian
  developers I know run testing on their laptop and stable only on their
  servers. I run stable on my laptop. I have a hectic schedule and always
  lots of work to do that, sadly, does not usually include “making my
  personal infrastructure setup do new things”. While I enjoy that
  sort of work, it’s a rabbit hole that I rarely have the luxury to enter.
  Running Debian stable on my laptop means I am (almost) never surprised by
  any behavior of my equipment. In the last nine years, if my computer does
  something weird, it’s basically always a hardware problem.

Sure, maybe you can get the last two mostly with other
distributions, but I don’t think you can get the first one anywhere
better. Anyway, I’ve gotta get to work for the day, but those of you out
there that make Debian happen, perhaps you’ll see a bit of a thank you from
me today. While I’ve thanked you all before, I think that no one does it
enough.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/12/15/what-debian-does.html

I woke up early this morning, and those of you live above 45° parallel
north or so are used to the “I’m wide awake but it’s still dark as
night” feeling in the winter. I usually don’t turn on the lights,
wander into my office, and just bring my computer out of hibernate; that
takes a bit as my 100% Free-Software-only computer is old and slow, so I
usually go to make coffee while that happens.

As I came back in my office this morning I was a bit struck by both
displays with the huge Debian screen lock image, and it got me thinking of
how Debian has been my companion for so many years.
I spoke about this at
DebConf
15 a bit, and wrote
about a similar concept years before. I realize that it’s been almost
nine years that I’ve been thinking rather deeply about my personal
relationship with Debian and why it matters.

This morning, I was inspired to post this because, echoing back to my
thoughts at my DebConf 15 talk, that I can’t actually do the work I do
without Debian. I thought this morning about a few simple things that
Debian gets done for me that are essential:

• Licensing assurance. I really can trust that Debian will not put
  something in main that fails to respect my software
  freedom. Given my lifelong work on Free Software licensing, yes, I can
  vet a codebase to search for hidden proprietary software among the Free,
  but it’s so convenient to have another group of people gladly do that job
  for me and other users.
• Curated and configured software, with connection to the
  expert. Some days it seems none of the new generation of
  developers are a fan of software packaging anymore. Anytime you want to
  run something new these days, someone is trying to convince you to
  download some docker image or something like that. It’s not that I don’t
  see the value in that, but what I usually want is that software I just
  read about installed on my machine as quickly as possible. Debian’s
  repository is huge, and the setup of Debian as a project allows for each
  package maintainer to work in relative independence to make the software
  of their interest run correctly as part of the whole. For the user, that
  means when I hear about some interesting software, Debian immediately
  connects me, via apt, with the individual expert who knows about that
  software and my operating system /
  distribution both. Apt, Debian’s Bug Tracker, etc. are actually a
  rudimentary but very usable form of a social networking that allows me to
  find the person who did the job to get this software actually working on
  my system. That’s a professional community that’s amazing
• Stability. It’s rather amusing, All the Debian
  developers I know run testing on their laptop and stable only on their
  servers. I run stable on my laptop. I have a hectic schedule and always
  lots of work to do that, sadly, does not usually include “making my
  personal infrastructure setup do new things”. While I enjoy that
  sort of work, it’s a rabbit hole that I rarely have the luxury to enter.
  Running Debian stable on my laptop means I am (almost) never surprised by
  any behavior of my equipment. In the last nine years, if my computer does
  something weird, it’s basically always a hardware problem.

Sure, maybe you can get the last two mostly with other
distributions, but I don’t think you can get the first one anywhere
better. Anyway, I’ve gotta get to work for the day, but those of you out
there that make Debian happen, perhaps you’ll see a bit of a thank you from
me today. While I’ve thanked you all before, I think that no one does it
enough.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/12/15/what-debian-does.html

I woke up early this morning, and those of you live above 45° parallel
north or so are used to the “I’m wide awake but it’s still dark as
night” feeling in the winter. I usually don’t turn on the lights,
wander into my office, and just bring my computer out of hibernate; that
takes a bit as my 100% Free-Software-only computer is old and slow, so I
usually go to make coffee while that happens.

As I came back in my office this morning I was a bit struck by both
displays with the huge Debian screen lock image, and it got me thinking of
how Debian has been my companion for so many years.
I spoke about this at
DebConf
15 a bit, and wrote
about a similar concept years before. I realize that it’s been almost
nine years that I’ve been thinking rather deeply about my personal
relationship with Debian and why it matters.

This morning, I was inspired to post this because, echoing back to my
thoughts at my DebConf 15 talk, that I can’t actually do the work I do
without Debian. I thought this morning about a few simple things that
Debian gets done for me that are essential:

• Licensing assurance. I really can trust that Debian will not put
  something in main that fails to respect my software
  freedom. Given my lifelong work on Free Software licensing, yes, I can
  vet a codebase to search for hidden proprietary software among the Free,
  but it’s so convenient to have another group of people gladly do that job
  for me and other users.
• Curated and configured software, with connection to the
  expert. Some days it seems none of the new generation of
  developers are a fan of software packaging anymore. Anytime you want to
  run something new these days, someone is trying to convince you to
  download some docker image or something like that. It’s not that I don’t
  see the value in that, but what I usually want is that software I just
  read about installed on my machine as quickly as possible. Debian’s
  repository is huge, and the setup of Debian as a project allows for each
  package maintainer to work in relative independence to make the software
  of their interest run correctly as part of the whole. For the user, that
  means when I hear about some interesting software, Debian immediately
  connects me, via apt, with the individual expert who knows about that
  software and my operating system /
  distribution both. Apt, Debian’s Bug Tracker, etc. are actually a
  rudimentary but very usable form of a social networking that allows me to
  find the person who did the job to get this software actually working on
  my system. That’s a professional community that’s amazing
• Stability. It’s rather amusing, All the Debian
  developers I know run testing on their laptop and stable only on their
  servers. I run stable on my laptop. I have a hectic schedule and always
  lots of work to do that, sadly, does not usually include “making my
  personal infrastructure setup do new things”. While I enjoy that
  sort of work, it’s a rabbit hole that I rarely have the luxury to enter.
  Running Debian stable on my laptop means I am (almost) never surprised by
  any behavior of my equipment. In the last nine years, if my computer does
  something weird, it’s basically always a hardware problem.

Sure, maybe you can get the last two mostly with other
distributions, but I don’t think you can get the first one anywhere
better. Anyway, I’ve gotta get to work for the day, but those of you out
there that make Debian happen, perhaps you’ll see a bit of a thank you from
me today. While I’ve thanked you all before, I think that no one does it
enough.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/12/15/what-debian-does.html

I woke up early this morning, and those of you live above 45° parallel
north or so are used to the “I’m wide awake but it’s still dark as
night” feeling in the winter. I usually don’t turn on the lights,
wander into my office, and just bring my computer out of hibernate; that
takes a bit as my 100% Free-Software-only computer is old and slow, so I
usually go to make coffee while that happens.

As I came back in my office this morning I was a bit struck by both
displays with the huge Debian screen lock image, and it got me thinking of
how Debian has been my companion for so many years.
I spoke about this at
DebConf
15 a bit, and wrote
about a similar concept years before. I realize that it’s been almost
nine years that I’ve been thinking rather deeply about my personal
relationship with Debian and why it matters.

This morning, I was inspired to post this because, echoing back to my
thoughts at my DebConf 15 talk, that I can’t actually do the work I do
without Debian. I thought this morning about a few simple things that
Debian gets done for me that are essential:

• Licensing assurance. I really can trust that Debian will not put
  something in main that fails to respect my software
  freedom. Given my lifelong work on Free Software licensing, yes, I can
  vet a codebase to search for hidden proprietary software among the Free,
  but it’s so convenient to have another group of people gladly do that job
  for me and other users.
• Curated and configured software, with connection to the
  expert. Some days it seems none of the new generation of
  developers are a fan of software packaging anymore. Anytime you want to
  run something new these days, someone is trying to convince you to
  download some docker image or something like that. It’s not that I don’t
  see the value in that, but what I usually want is that software I just
  read about installed on my machine as quickly as possible. Debian’s
  repository is huge, and the setup of Debian as a project allows for each
  package maintainer to work in relative independence to make the software
  of their interest run correctly as part of the whole. For the user, that
  means when I hear about some interesting software, Debian immediately
  connects me, via apt, with the individual expert who knows about that
  software and my operating system /
  distribution both. Apt, Debian’s Bug Tracker, etc. are actually a
  rudimentary but very usable form of a social networking that allows me to
  find the person who did the job to get this software actually working on
  my system. That’s a professional community that’s amazing
• Stability. It’s rather amusing, All the Debian
  developers I know run testing on their laptop and stable only on their
  servers. I run stable on my laptop. I have a hectic schedule and always
  lots of work to do that, sadly, does not usually include “making my
  personal infrastructure setup do new things”. While I enjoy that
  sort of work, it’s a rabbit hole that I rarely have the luxury to enter.
  Running Debian stable on my laptop means I am (almost) never surprised by
  any behavior of my equipment. In the last nine years, if my computer does
  something weird, it’s basically always a hardware problem.

Sure, maybe you can get the last two mostly with other
distributions, but I don’t think you can get the first one anywhere
better. Anyway, I’ve gotta get to work for the day, but those of you out
there that make Debian happen, perhaps you’ll see a bit of a thank you from
me today. While I’ve thanked you all before, I think that no one does it
enough.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/12/15/what-debian-does.html

I woke up early this morning, and those of you live above 45° parallel
north or so are used to the “I’m wide awake but it’s still dark as
night” feeling in the winter. I usually don’t turn on the lights,
wander into my office, and just bring my computer out of hibernate; that
takes a bit as my 100% Free-Software-only computer is old and slow, so I
usually go to make coffee while that happens.

As I came back in my office this morning I was a bit struck by both
displays with the huge Debian screen lock image, and it got me thinking of
how Debian has been my companion for so many years.
I spoke about this at
DebConf
15 a bit, and wrote
about a similar concept years before. I realize that it’s been almost
nine years that I’ve been thinking rather deeply about my personal
relationship with Debian and why it matters.

This morning, I was inspired to post this because, echoing back to my
thoughts at my DebConf 15 talk, that I can’t actually do the work I do
without Debian. I thought this morning about a few simple things that
Debian gets done for me that are essential:

• Licensing assurance. I really can trust that Debian will not put
  something in main that fails to respect my software
  freedom. Given my lifelong work on Free Software licensing, yes, I can
  vet a codebase to search for hidden proprietary software among the Free,
  but it’s so convenient to have another group of people gladly do that job
  for me and other users.
• Curated and configured software, with connection to the
  expert. Some days it seems none of the new generation of
  developers are a fan of software packaging anymore. Anytime you want to
  run something new these days, someone is trying to convince you to
  download some docker image or something like that. It’s not that I don’t
  see the value in that, but what I usually want is that software I just
  read about installed on my machine as quickly as possible. Debian’s
  repository is huge, and the setup of Debian as a project allows for each
  package maintainer to work in relative independence to make the software
  of their interest run correctly as part of the whole. For the user, that
  means when I hear about some interesting software, Debian immediately
  connects me, via apt, with the individual expert who knows about that
  software and my operating system /
  distribution both. Apt, Debian’s Bug Tracker, etc. are actually a
  rudimentary but very usable form of a social networking that allows me to
  find the person who did the job to get this software actually working on
  my system. That’s a professional community that’s amazing
• Stability. It’s rather amusing, All the Debian
  developers I know run testing on their laptop and stable only on their
  servers. I run stable on my laptop. I have a hectic schedule and always
  lots of work to do that, sadly, does not usually include “making my
  personal infrastructure setup do new things”. While I enjoy that
  sort of work, it’s a rabbit hole that I rarely have the luxury to enter.
  Running Debian stable on my laptop means I am (almost) never surprised by
  any behavior of my equipment. In the last nine years, if my computer does
  something weird, it’s basically always a hardware problem.

Sure, maybe you can get the last two mostly with other
distributions, but I don’t think you can get the first one anywhere
better. Anyway, I’ve gotta get to work for the day, but those of you out
there that make Debian happen, perhaps you’ll see a bit of a thank you from
me today. While I’ve thanked you all before, I think that no one does it
enough.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/12/15/what-debian-does.html

I woke up early this morning, and those of you live above 45° parallel
north or so are used to the “I’m wide awake but it’s still dark as
night” feeling in the winter. I usually don’t turn on the lights,
wander into my office, and just bring my computer out of hibernate; that
takes a bit as my 100% Free-Software-only computer is old and slow, so I
usually go to make coffee while that happens.

As I came back in my office this morning I was a bit struck by both
displays with the huge Debian screen lock image, and it got me thinking of
how Debian has been my companion for so many years.
I spoke about this at
DebConf
15 a bit, and wrote
about a similar concept years before. I realize that it’s been almost
nine years that I’ve been thinking rather deeply about my personal
relationship with Debian and why it matters.

This morning, I was inspired to post this because, echoing back to my
thoughts at my DebConf 15 talk, that I can’t actually do the work I do
without Debian. I thought this morning about a few simple things that
Debian gets done for me that are essential:

• Licensing assurance. I really can trust that Debian will not put
  something in main that fails to respect my software
  freedom. Given my lifelong work on Free Software licensing, yes, I can
  vet a codebase to search for hidden proprietary software among the Free,
  but it’s so convenient to have another group of people gladly do that job
  for me and other users.
• Curated and configured software, with connection to the
  expert. Some days it seems none of the new generation of
  developers are a fan of software packaging anymore. Anytime you want to
  run something new these days, someone is trying to convince you to
  download some docker image or something like that. It’s not that I don’t
  see the value in that, but what I usually want is that software I just
  read about installed on my machine as quickly as possible. Debian’s
  repository is huge, and the setup of Debian as a project allows for each
  package maintainer to work in relative independence to make the software
  of their interest run correctly as part of the whole. For the user, that
  means when I hear about some interesting software, Debian immediately
  connects me, via apt, with the individual expert who knows about that
  software and my operating system /
  distribution both. Apt, Debian’s Bug Tracker, etc. are actually a
  rudimentary but very usable form of a social networking that allows me to
  find the person who did the job to get this software actually working on
  my system. That’s a professional community that’s amazing
• Stability. It’s rather amusing, All the Debian
  developers I know run testing on their laptop and stable only on their
  servers. I run stable on my laptop. I have a hectic schedule and always
  lots of work to do that, sadly, does not usually include “making my
  personal infrastructure setup do new things”. While I enjoy that
  sort of work, it’s a rabbit hole that I rarely have the luxury to enter.
  Running Debian stable on my laptop means I am (almost) never surprised by
  any behavior of my equipment. In the last nine years, if my computer does
  something weird, it’s basically always a hardware problem.

Sure, maybe you can get the last two mostly with other
distributions, but I don’t think you can get the first one anywhere
better. Anyway, I’ve gotta get to work for the day, but those of you out
there that make Debian happen, perhaps you’ll see a bit of a thank you from
me today. While I’ve thanked you all before, I think that no one does it
enough.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/11/22/gnu-kind-communication-guidelines.html

I have until now avoided making a public statement about my views on the
various interrelated issues regarding the GNU Kind Communication
Guidelines that came up over the last month. However, given
increasing interest in our community on these issues, and the repeated
inquiries that I received privately from major contributors in our
community, I now must state my views publicly. I don’t have much desire to
debate these topics in public, nor do I think such is particularly useful,
but I’ve been asked frequently about these GNU policy statements. I feel,
if for no other reason than efficiency, that I should share them in one
place publicly for easy reference:

• I think
  the GNU
  Kind Communication Guidelines, as a stand-alone document, are useful
  suggestions and helpful to the GNU project and would be helpful, if
  adopted, for any software freedom project.
• However, I think that the GNU Kind Communication
  Guidelines standing alone are inadequate for a project of GNU’s
  size and number of contributors to address the stated problems.
  Traditional Codes of Conduct, particularly those that offer mechanisms
  for complaint resolution when bad behavior occurs, are necessary in Free
  Software projects of GNU’s size. Codes of Conduct are the best mechanism
  known today in our community to ensure welcoming environments for those
  who might be targeted by inappropriate and unprofessional behavior.
• I therefore disagree with
  the meta-material stated in
  the announcement of these Communication Guidelines. First, I
  disagree with the decision to reject any Code of Conduct for the GNU
  project. Second, I believe that diversity is an important goal for
  advancing software freedom and human equality generally. I support all
  Outreachy‘s goals (including their
  political ones) and I work hard to help Outreachy
  succeed as part of my day job. I have publicly supported affirmative
  action since the early 1990s, and continue to support it. I agree with
  “making diversity a goal”; Richard Stallman (RMS), speaking
  on behalf of GNU, states
  that perse disagrees with “making diversity a goal”.
• I also disagree with encouraging GNU project contributors to ignore
  the request of non-binary-gender individuals who ask for the pronouns
  they/them⁰,
  as
  stated
  in RMS’ personal essay linked to from the GNU Kind Communication
  Guidelines. My position is that refusing to use the pronouns
  people ask for is the same unkindness as refusing to call transgender
  people by a name that is not their legal name when they request it. I
  don’t think the grammatical argument that “pronouns are different
  from proper nouns” is compelling enough to warrant unwelcoming
  behavior toward these individuals. The words people use matter. RMS has
  insisted for years that people make a clear distinction between open
  source and free software — for good reason —. I believe that
  how we say things makes a political statement in itself.
• Related to the last point, I am concerned with the conflating of GNU
  project views with RMS’ personal views. RMS seems to have decided
  unilaterally that GNU would take a position that requests for use of
  they/them pronouns need not be honored. I think it is essential that RMS
  keeps per personal views separate from official GNU policy; I have said
  so many times to the FSF Board of Directors in various contexts. It was
  a surprise to me that RMS’ personal view on this issue was referenced as
  part of GNU project guidelines.
• I think
  the GNU
  Kindness Communication Guidelines should apply to all communication from
  the project, including GNU manuals themselves, and I also believe the
  glibc abort() joke should be removed. I don’t believe
  free speech of anyone is impacted if a Free Software project forbids
  certain types of off-topic communication in its official channels.
  Everyone can have their own website and blog to express their personal
  views; they don’t need to do so through project channels.

I have been encouraged many times this year by various prominent community
members to resign from the FSF’s Board of Directors (sometimes over these
issues, and sometimes over other, similar issues). I have also received
many private communications from other prominent community members
(including some GNU contributors) expressing similar concerns to the above,
but these individuals noted that they feel much better about the FSF and
its shepherding of the GNU project because I’m on the FSF Board of
Directors, even though I clearly pointed out to them that my views on these
matters will not necessarily become GNU and/or FSF policy. The argument
that many have made to me is that it’s valuable to have dissenting opinions
in the leadership on these issues, even if those dissenting opinions do not
become FSF and/or GNU policy.

I am swayed by the latter argument, and I have decided to continue as an
FSF Director indefinitely (assuming the other Directors wish me to
continue). However, these recent public positions are far enough out of
alignment with my own views that I feel it necessary to exercise my own
free speech rights here on my personal blog and state my disagreement with
them. I will continue to urge the FSF and GNU to change and/or clarify
these positions. (I also sent this blog post privately to the FSF
Directors 8 days before I posted it, and had also discussed these concerns
in detail with RMS for a month before posting this.)

Governing well means working (and finding common ground) with those you
disagree. We oscillate a bit too much in software freedom communities:
either we air every last disagreement no matter how minor, or (perhaps as
an over-correction to the former) we seek to represent a seemingly perfect
consensus even when one isn’t present. I try to avoid both extremes; so
this is the first time in my many years on the FSF Board of Directors where
I’ve publicly disagreed with an FSF or GNU project policy. FSF and GNU
primarily fight for one principle: equal software freedom for all users and
developers. On other topics, there can easily exist disagreement, and
working through those disagreements together, in my opinion, usually make
the community stronger.

As always, this is my personal blog, and nothing here necessarily reflects
the official views of any organization with which I am affiliated,
including not only the Free Software Foundation and GNU, but also Software
Freedom Conservancy.

Change made on 2019-03-25: Above, the words I am
a supporter of
Outreachy and work hard to help it
succeed as part of my day job. were changed to:
I support all
Outreachy‘s goals (including their
political ones)

⁰
A review of
various
archive.org
links
shows that this particular text was surreptitious changed in the weeks
following my publication of this blog post. I was never contacted nor
consulted to review the original condemnation by the GNU project of
they/them pronouns nor the improvements. This footnote here was added in
2020 long after these incidents, as that’s when I first became aware those
changes were made after the fact. I believe that the change, which evolved
into something more reasonable after a few months of edits (but coming
after I posted this blog) vindicates both my position that the GNU project
should not have initially condemned the use of they/them pronouns for
non-binary individuals, and that it would have been advisable for the GNU
project to seek input from the FSF Board of Directors (which I
was a member of at the time
but am no longer) before setting such policies about diversity and
inclusiveness.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/11/22/gnu-kind-communication-guidelines.html

I have until now avoided making a public statement about my views on the
various interrelated issues regarding the GNU Kind Communication
Guidelines that came up over the last month. However, given
increasing interest in our community on these issues, and the repeated
inquiries that I received privately from major contributors in our
community, I now must state my views publicly. I don’t have much desire to
debate these topics in public, nor do I think such is particularly useful,
but I’ve been asked frequently about these GNU policy statements. I feel,
if for no other reason than efficiency, that I should share them in one
place publicly for easy reference:

• I think
  the GNU
  Kind Communication Guidelines, as a stand-alone document, are useful
  suggestions and helpful to the GNU project and would be helpful, if
  adopted, for any software freedom project.
• However, I think that the GNU Kind Communication
  Guidelines standing alone are inadequate for a project of GNU’s
  size and number of contributors to address the stated problems.
  Traditional Codes of Conduct, particularly those that offer mechanisms
  for complaint resolution when bad behavior occurs, are necessary in Free
  Software projects of GNU’s size. Codes of Conduct are the best mechanism
  known today in our community to ensure welcoming environments for those
  who might be targeted by inappropriate and unprofessional behavior.
• I therefore disagree with
  the meta-material stated in
  the announcement of these Communication Guidelines. First, I
  disagree with the decision to reject any Code of Conduct for the GNU
  project. Second, I believe that diversity is an important goal for
  advancing software freedom and human equality generally. I support all
  Outreachy‘s goals (including their
  political ones) and I work hard to help Outreachy
  succeed as part of my day job. I have publicly supported affirmative
  action since the early 1990s, and continue to support it. I agree with
  “making diversity a goal”; Richard Stallman (RMS), speaking
  on behalf of GNU, states
  that perse disagrees with “making diversity a goal”.
• I also disagree with encouraging GNU project contributors to ignore
  the request of non-binary-gender individuals who ask for the pronouns
  they/them⁰,
  as
  stated
  in RMS’ personal essay linked to from the GNU Kind Communication
  Guidelines. My position is that refusing to use the pronouns
  people ask for is the same unkindness as refusing to call transgender
  people by a name that is not their legal name when they request it. I
  don’t think the grammatical argument that “pronouns are different
  from proper nouns” is compelling enough to warrant unwelcoming
  behavior toward these individuals. The words people use matter. RMS has
  insisted for years that people make a clear distinction between open
  source and free software — for good reason —. I believe that
  how we say things makes a political statement in itself.
• Related to the last point, I am concerned with the conflating of GNU
  project views with RMS’ personal views. RMS seems to have decided
  unilaterally that GNU would take a position that requests for use of
  they/them pronouns need not be honored. I think it is essential that RMS
  keeps per personal views separate from official GNU policy; I have said
  so many times to the FSF Board of Directors in various contexts. It was
  a surprise to me that RMS’ personal view on this issue was referenced as
  part of GNU project guidelines.
• I think
  the GNU
  Kindness Communication Guidelines should apply to all communication from
  the project, including GNU manuals themselves, and I also believe the
  glibc abort() joke should be removed. I don’t believe
  free speech of anyone is impacted if a Free Software project forbids
  certain types of off-topic communication in its official channels.
  Everyone can have their own website and blog to express their personal
  views; they don’t need to do so through project channels.

I have been encouraged many times this year by various prominent community
members to resign from the FSF’s Board of Directors (sometimes over these
issues, and sometimes over other, similar issues). I have also received
many private communications from other prominent community members
(including some GNU contributors) expressing similar concerns to the above,
but these individuals noted that they feel much better about the FSF and
its shepherding of the GNU project because I’m on the FSF Board of
Directors, even though I clearly pointed out to them that my views on these
matters will not necessarily become GNU and/or FSF policy. The argument
that many have made to me is that it’s valuable to have dissenting opinions
in the leadership on these issues, even if those dissenting opinions do not
become FSF and/or GNU policy.

I am swayed by the latter argument, and I have decided to continue as an
FSF Director indefinitely (assuming the other Directors wish me to
continue). However, these recent public positions are far enough out of
alignment with my own views that I feel it necessary to exercise my own
free speech rights here on my personal blog and state my disagreement with
them. I will continue to urge the FSF and GNU to change and/or clarify
these positions. (I also sent this blog post privately to the FSF
Directors 8 days before I posted it, and had also discussed these concerns
in detail with RMS for a month before posting this.)

Governing well means working (and finding common ground) with those you
disagree. We oscillate a bit too much in software freedom communities:
either we air every last disagreement no matter how minor, or (perhaps as
an over-correction to the former) we seek to represent a seemingly perfect
consensus even when one isn’t present. I try to avoid both extremes; so
this is the first time in my many years on the FSF Board of Directors where
I’ve publicly disagreed with an FSF or GNU project policy. FSF and GNU
primarily fight for one principle: equal software freedom for all users and
developers. On other topics, there can easily exist disagreement, and
working through those disagreements together, in my opinion, usually make
the community stronger.

As always, this is my personal blog, and nothing here necessarily reflects
the official views of any organization with which I am affiliated,
including not only the Free Software Foundation and GNU, but also Software
Freedom Conservancy.

Change made on 2019-03-25: Above, the words I am
a supporter of
Outreachy and work hard to help it
succeed as part of my day job. were changed to:
I support all
Outreachy‘s goals (including their
political ones)

⁰
A review of
various
archive.org
links
shows that this particular text was surreptitious changed in the weeks
following my publication of this blog post. I was never contacted nor
consulted to review the original condemnation by the GNU project of
they/them pronouns nor the improvements. This footnote here was added in
2020 long after these incidents, as that’s when I first became aware those
changes were made after the fact. I believe that the change, which evolved
into something more reasonable after a few months of edits (but coming
after I posted this blog) vindicates both my position that the GNU project
should not have initially condemned the use of they/them pronouns for
non-binary individuals, and that it would have been advisable for the GNU
project to seek input from the FSF Board of Directors (which I
was a member of at the time
but am no longer) before setting such policies about diversity and
inclusiveness.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/11/22/gnu-kind-communication-guidelines.html

I have until now avoided making a public statement about my views on the
various interrelated issues regarding the GNU Kind Communication
Guidelines that came up over the last month. However, given
increasing interest in our community on these issues, and the repeated
inquiries that I received privately from major contributors in our
community, I now must state my views publicly. I don’t have much desire to
debate these topics in public, nor do I think such is particularly useful,
but I’ve been asked frequently about these GNU policy statements. I feel,
if for no other reason than efficiency, that I should share them in one
place publicly for easy reference:

• I think
  the GNU
  Kind Communication Guidelines, as a stand-alone document, are useful
  suggestions and helpful to the GNU project and would be helpful, if
  adopted, for any software freedom project.
• However, I think that the GNU Kind Communication
  Guidelines standing alone are inadequate for a project of GNU’s
  size and number of contributors to address the stated problems.
  Traditional Codes of Conduct, particularly those that offer mechanisms
  for complaint resolution when bad behavior occurs, are necessary in Free
  Software projects of GNU’s size. Codes of Conduct are the best mechanism
  known today in our community to ensure welcoming environments for those
  who might be targeted by inappropriate and unprofessional behavior.
• I therefore disagree with
  the meta-material stated in
  the announcement of these Communication Guidelines. First, I
  disagree with the decision to reject any Code of Conduct for the GNU
  project. Second, I believe that diversity is an important goal for
  advancing software freedom and human equality generally. I support all
  Outreachy‘s goals (including their
  political ones) and I work hard to help Outreachy
  succeed as part of my day job. I have publicly supported affirmative
  action since the early 1990s, and continue to support it. I agree with
  “making diversity a goal”; Richard Stallman (RMS), speaking
  on behalf of GNU, states
  that perse disagrees with “making diversity a goal”.
• I also disagree with encouraging GNU project contributors to ignore
  the request of non-binary-gender individuals who ask for the pronouns
  they/them⁰,
  as
  stated
  in RMS’ personal essay linked to from the GNU Kind Communication
  Guidelines. My position is that refusing to use the pronouns
  people ask for is the same unkindness as refusing to call transgender
  people by a name that is not their legal name when they request it. I
  don’t think the grammatical argument that “pronouns are different
  from proper nouns” is compelling enough to warrant unwelcoming
  behavior toward these individuals. The words people use matter. RMS has
  insisted for years that people make a clear distinction between open
  source and free software — for good reason —. I believe that
  how we say things makes a political statement in itself.
• Related to the last point, I am concerned with the conflating of GNU
  project views with RMS’ personal views. RMS seems to have decided
  unilaterally that GNU would take a position that requests for use of
  they/them pronouns need not be honored. I think it is essential that RMS
  keeps per personal views separate from official GNU policy; I have said
  so many times to the FSF Board of Directors in various contexts. It was
  a surprise to me that RMS’ personal view on this issue was referenced as
  part of GNU project guidelines.
• I think
  the GNU
  Kindness Communication Guidelines should apply to all communication from
  the project, including GNU manuals themselves, and I also believe the
  glibc abort() joke should be removed. I don’t believe
  free speech of anyone is impacted if a Free Software project forbids
  certain types of off-topic communication in its official channels.
  Everyone can have their own website and blog to express their personal
  views; they don’t need to do so through project channels.

I have been encouraged many times this year by various prominent community
members to resign from the FSF’s Board of Directors (sometimes over these
issues, and sometimes over other, similar issues). I have also received
many private communications from other prominent community members
(including some GNU contributors) expressing similar concerns to the above,
but these individuals noted that they feel much better about the FSF and
its shepherding of the GNU project because I’m on the FSF Board of
Directors, even though I clearly pointed out to them that my views on these
matters will not necessarily become GNU and/or FSF policy. The argument
that many have made to me is that it’s valuable to have dissenting opinions
in the leadership on these issues, even if those dissenting opinions do not
become FSF and/or GNU policy.

I am swayed by the latter argument, and I have decided to continue as an
FSF Director indefinitely (assuming the other Directors wish me to
continue). However, these recent public positions are far enough out of
alignment with my own views that I feel it necessary to exercise my own
free speech rights here on my personal blog and state my disagreement with
them. I will continue to urge the FSF and GNU to change and/or clarify
these positions. (I also sent this blog post privately to the FSF
Directors 8 days before I posted it, and had also discussed these concerns
in detail with RMS for a month before posting this.)

Governing well means working (and finding common ground) with those you
disagree. We oscillate a bit too much in software freedom communities:
either we air every last disagreement no matter how minor, or (perhaps as
an over-correction to the former) we seek to represent a seemingly perfect
consensus even when one isn’t present. I try to avoid both extremes; so
this is the first time in my many years on the FSF Board of Directors where
I’ve publicly disagreed with an FSF or GNU project policy. FSF and GNU
primarily fight for one principle: equal software freedom for all users and
developers. On other topics, there can easily exist disagreement, and
working through those disagreements together, in my opinion, usually make
the community stronger.

As always, this is my personal blog, and nothing here necessarily reflects
the official views of any organization with which I am affiliated,
including not only the Free Software Foundation and GNU, but also Software
Freedom Conservancy.

Change made on 2019-03-25: Above, the words I am
a supporter of
Outreachy and work hard to help it
succeed as part of my day job. were changed to:
I support all
Outreachy‘s goals (including their
political ones)

⁰
A review of
various
archive.org
links
shows that this particular text was surreptitious changed in the weeks
following my publication of this blog post. I was never contacted nor
consulted to review the original condemnation by the GNU project of
they/them pronouns nor the improvements. This footnote here was added in
2020 long after these incidents, as that’s when I first became aware those
changes were made after the fact. I believe that the change, which evolved
into something more reasonable after a few months of edits (but coming
after I posted this blog) vindicates both my position that the GNU project
should not have initially condemned the use of they/them pronouns for
non-binary individuals, and that it would have been advisable for the GNU
project to seek input from the FSF Board of Directors (which I
was a member of at the time
but am no longer) before setting such policies about diversity and
inclusiveness.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/11/22/gnu-kind-communication-guidelines.html

I have until now avoided making a public statement about my views on the
various interrelated issues regarding the GNU Kind Communication
Guidelines that came up over the last month. However, given
increasing interest in our community on these issues, and the repeated
inquiries that I received privately from major contributors in our
community, I now must state my views publicly. I don’t have much desire to
debate these topics in public, nor do I think such is particularly useful,
but I’ve been asked frequently about these GNU policy statements. I feel,
if for no other reason than efficiency, that I should share them in one
place publicly for easy reference:

• I think
  the GNU
  Kind Communication Guidelines, as a stand-alone document, are useful
  suggestions and helpful to the GNU project and would be helpful, if
  adopted, for any software freedom project.
• However, I think that the GNU Kind Communication
  Guidelines standing alone are inadequate for a project of GNU’s
  size and number of contributors to address the stated problems.
  Traditional Codes of Conduct, particularly those that offer mechanisms
  for complaint resolution when bad behavior occurs, are necessary in Free
  Software projects of GNU’s size. Codes of Conduct are the best mechanism
  known today in our community to ensure welcoming environments for those
  who might be targeted by inappropriate and unprofessional behavior.
• I therefore disagree with
  the meta-material stated in
  the announcement of these Communication Guidelines. First, I
  disagree with the decision to reject any Code of Conduct for the GNU
  project. Second, I believe that diversity is an important goal for
  advancing software freedom and human equality generally. I support all
  Outreachy‘s goals (including their
  political ones) and I work hard to help Outreachy
  succeed as part of my day job. I have publicly supported affirmative
  action since the early 1990s, and continue to support it. I agree with
  “making diversity a goal”; Richard Stallman (RMS), speaking
  on behalf of GNU, states
  that perse disagrees with “making diversity a goal”.
• I also disagree with encouraging GNU project contributors to ignore
  the request of non-binary-gender individuals who ask for the pronouns
  they/them⁰,
  as
  stated
  in RMS’ personal essay linked to from the GNU Kind Communication
  Guidelines. My position is that refusing to use the pronouns
  people ask for is the same unkindness as refusing to call transgender
  people by a name that is not their legal name when they request it. I
  don’t think the grammatical argument that “pronouns are different
  from proper nouns” is compelling enough to warrant unwelcoming
  behavior toward these individuals. The words people use matter. RMS has
  insisted for years that people make a clear distinction between open
  source and free software — for good reason —. I believe that
  how we say things makes a political statement in itself.
• Related to the last point, I am concerned with the conflating of GNU
  project views with RMS’ personal views. RMS seems to have decided
  unilaterally that GNU would take a position that requests for use of
  they/them pronouns need not be honored. I think it is essential that RMS
  keeps per personal views separate from official GNU policy; I have said
  so many times to the FSF Board of Directors in various contexts. It was
  a surprise to me that RMS’ personal view on this issue was referenced as
  part of GNU project guidelines.
• I think
  the GNU
  Kindness Communication Guidelines should apply to all communication from
  the project, including GNU manuals themselves, and I also believe the
  glibc abort() joke should be removed. I don’t believe
  free speech of anyone is impacted if a Free Software project forbids
  certain types of off-topic communication in its official channels.
  Everyone can have their own website and blog to express their personal
  views; they don’t need to do so through project channels.

I have been encouraged many times this year by various prominent community
members to resign from the FSF’s Board of Directors (sometimes over these
issues, and sometimes over other, similar issues). I have also received
many private communications from other prominent community members
(including some GNU contributors) expressing similar concerns to the above,
but these individuals noted that they feel much better about the FSF and
its shepherding of the GNU project because I’m on the FSF Board of
Directors, even though I clearly pointed out to them that my views on these
matters will not necessarily become GNU and/or FSF policy. The argument
that many have made to me is that it’s valuable to have dissenting opinions
in the leadership on these issues, even if those dissenting opinions do not
become FSF and/or GNU policy.

I am swayed by the latter argument, and I have decided to continue as an
FSF Director indefinitely (assuming the other Directors wish me to
continue). However, these recent public positions are far enough out of
alignment with my own views that I feel it necessary to exercise my own
free speech rights here on my personal blog and state my disagreement with
them. I will continue to urge the FSF and GNU to change and/or clarify
these positions. (I also sent this blog post privately to the FSF
Directors 8 days before I posted it, and had also discussed these concerns
in detail with RMS for a month before posting this.)

Governing well means working (and finding common ground) with those you
disagree. We oscillate a bit too much in software freedom communities:
either we air every last disagreement no matter how minor, or (perhaps as
an over-correction to the former) we seek to represent a seemingly perfect
consensus even when one isn’t present. I try to avoid both extremes; so
this is the first time in my many years on the FSF Board of Directors where
I’ve publicly disagreed with an FSF or GNU project policy. FSF and GNU
primarily fight for one principle: equal software freedom for all users and
developers. On other topics, there can easily exist disagreement, and
working through those disagreements together, in my opinion, usually make
the community stronger.

As always, this is my personal blog, and nothing here necessarily reflects
the official views of any organization with which I am affiliated,
including not only the Free Software Foundation and GNU, but also Software
Freedom Conservancy.

Change made on 2019-03-25: Above, the words I am
a supporter of
Outreachy and work hard to help it
succeed as part of my day job. were changed to:
I support all
Outreachy‘s goals (including their
political ones)

⁰
A review of
various
archive.org
links
shows that this particular text was surreptitious changed in the weeks
following my publication of this blog post. I was never contacted nor
consulted to review the original condemnation by the GNU project of
they/them pronouns nor the improvements. This footnote here was added in
2020 long after these incidents, as that’s when I first became aware those
changes were made after the fact. I believe that the change, which evolved
into something more reasonable after a few months of edits (but coming
after I posted this blog) vindicates both my position that the GNU project
should not have initially condemned the use of they/them pronouns for
non-binary individuals, and that it would have been advisable for the GNU
project to seek input from the FSF Board of Directors (which I
was a member of at the time
but am no longer) before setting such policies about diversity and
inclusiveness.

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2018/11/22/gnu-kind-communication-guidelines.html

I have until now avoided making a public statement about my views on the
various interrelated issues regarding the GNU Kind Communication
Guidelines that came up over the last month. However, given
increasing interest in our community on these issues, and the repeated
inquiries that I received privately from major contributors in our
community, I now must state my views publicly. I don’t have much desire to
debate these topics in public, nor do I think such is particularly useful,
but I’ve been asked frequently about these GNU policy statements. I feel,
if for no other reason than efficiency, that I should share them in one
place publicly for easy reference:

• I think
  the GNU
  Kind Communication Guidelines, as a stand-alone document, are useful
  suggestions and helpful to the GNU project and would be helpful, if
  adopted, for any software freedom project.
• However, I think that the GNU Kind Communication
  Guidelines standing alone are inadequate for a project of GNU’s
  size and number of contributors to address the stated problems.
  Traditional Codes of Conduct, particularly those that offer mechanisms
  for complaint resolution when bad behavior occurs, are necessary in Free
  Software projects of GNU’s size. Codes of Conduct are the best mechanism
  known today in our community to ensure welcoming environments for those
  who might be targeted by inappropriate and unprofessional behavior.
• I therefore disagree with
  the meta-material stated in
  the announcement of these Communication Guidelines. First, I
  disagree with the decision to reject any Code of Conduct for the GNU
  project. Second, I believe that diversity is an important goal for
  advancing software freedom and human equality generally. I support all
  Outreachy‘s goals (including their
  political ones) and I work hard to help Outreachy
  succeed as part of my day job. I have publicly supported affirmative
  action since the early 1990s, and continue to support it. I agree with
  “making diversity a goal”; Richard Stallman (RMS), speaking
  on behalf of GNU, states
  that perse disagrees with “making diversity a goal”.
• I also disagree with encouraging GNU project contributors to ignore
  the request of non-binary-gender individuals who ask for the pronouns
  they/them⁰,
  as
  stated
  in RMS’ personal essay linked to from the GNU Kind Communication
  Guidelines. My position is that refusing to use the pronouns
  people ask for is the same unkindness as refusing to call transgender
  people by a name that is not their legal name when they request it. I
  don’t think the grammatical argument that “pronouns are different
  from proper nouns” is compelling enough to warrant unwelcoming
  behavior toward these individuals. The words people use matter. RMS has
  insisted for years that people make a clear distinction between open
  source and free software — for good reason —. I believe that
  how we say things makes a political statement in itself.
• Related to the last point, I am concerned with the conflating of GNU
  project views with RMS’ personal views. RMS seems to have decided
  unilaterally that GNU would take a position that requests for use of
  they/them pronouns need not be honored. I think it is essential that RMS
  keeps per personal views separate from official GNU policy; I have said
  so many times to the FSF Board of Directors in various contexts. It was
  a surprise to me that RMS’ personal view on this issue was referenced as
  part of GNU project guidelines.
• I think
  the GNU
  Kindness Communication Guidelines should apply to all communication from
  the project, including GNU manuals themselves, and I also believe the
  glibc abort() joke should be removed. I don’t believe
  free speech of anyone is impacted if a Free Software project forbids
  certain types of off-topic communication in its official channels.
  Everyone can have their own website and blog to express their personal
  views; they don’t need to do so through project channels.

I have been encouraged many times this year by various prominent community
members to resign from the FSF’s Board of Directors (sometimes over these
issues, and sometimes over other, similar issues). I have also received
many private communications from other prominent community members
(including some GNU contributors) expressing similar concerns to the above,
but these individuals noted that they feel much better about the FSF and
its shepherding of the GNU project because I’m on the FSF Board of
Directors, even though I clearly pointed out to them that my views on these
matters will not necessarily become GNU and/or FSF policy. The argument
that many have made to me is that it’s valuable to have dissenting opinions
in the leadership on these issues, even if those dissenting opinions do not
become FSF and/or GNU policy.

I am swayed by the latter argument, and I have decided to continue as an
FSF Director indefinitely (assuming the other Directors wish me to
continue). However, these recent public positions are far enough out of
alignment with my own views that I feel it necessary to exercise my own
free speech rights here on my personal blog and state my disagreement with
them. I will continue to urge the FSF and GNU to change and/or clarify
these positions. (I also sent this blog post privately to the FSF
Directors 8 days before I posted it, and had also discussed these concerns
in detail with RMS for a month before posting this.)

Governing well means working (and finding common ground) with those you
disagree. We oscillate a bit too much in software freedom communities:
either we air every last disagreement no matter how minor, or (perhaps as
an over-correction to the former) we seek to represent a seemingly perfect
consensus even when one isn’t present. I try to avoid both extremes; so
this is the first time in my many years on the FSF Board of Directors where
I’ve publicly disagreed with an FSF or GNU project policy. FSF and GNU
primarily fight for one principle: equal software freedom for all users and
developers. On other topics, there can easily exist disagreement, and
working through those disagreements together, in my opinion, usually make
the community stronger.

As always, this is my personal blog, and nothing here necessarily reflects
the official views of any organization with which I am affiliated,
including not only the Free Software Foundation and GNU, but also Software
Freedom Conservancy.

Change made on 2019-03-25: Above, the words I am
a supporter of
Outreachy and work hard to help it
succeed as part of my day job. were changed to:
I support all
Outreachy‘s goals (including their
political ones)

⁰
A review of
various
archive.org
links
shows that this particular text was surreptitious changed in the weeks
following my publication of this blog post. I was never contacted nor
consulted to review the original condemnation by the GNU project of
they/them pronouns nor the improvements. This footnote here was added in
2020 long after these incidents, as that’s when I first became aware those
changes were made after the fact. I believe that the change, which evolved
into something more reasonable after a few months of edits (but coming
after I posted this blog) vindicates both my position that the GNU project
should not have initially condemned the use of they/them pronouns for
non-binary individuals, and that it would have been advisable for the GNU
project to seek input from the FSF Board of Directors (which I
was a member of at the time
but am no longer) before setting such policies about diversity and
inclusiveness.