[FSFLA] Hiperbola: A fully free, stable, secure, simple, lightweight and long-term distribution

[Quiliro]

El Thu, 25 May 2017 13:55:17 -0400
"Eder L. Marques" <eder at edermarques.net> escribió:

> > 
>  >> Hey! this sounds good! But the first thing I thought is what
> happened
>  >> with Parabola? How is Hyperbola different from Parabola? I mean,
> what
>  >> is the motivation to create yet another distro instead of
> colaborate
>  >> with an existing (and already FSF approved) one?
> 
>  >It is because of different objectives of the projects and some
> personal problems between devs caused by someone external to Parabola.
> I hope some day they merge. It is very > >probable because of very the
> similar tools they use and how complementary they are.
> 
> Hi team,
> 
> I saw this happening several times, and although I am not a active
> contributor I would like to add my 0.02 to this thread.

Thank you.

> Why do we need yet another gnu-linux[-libre] distribution?

Because the developer decided it was necesary.

> IMHO, in order for a distro to meet security and privacy standards
> there is a huge effort to be done. Outdated distros, or not so fast
> updated, are a considerable problem. Not saying that
> Hyperbola/Parabola are/will be, but history has tons of examples.

I agree.

> Why not to use a standard distro and build a 'freedom-filter' on top
> of it? Or alternative packages?

I don't know.

> Every time we create a new distro we make the lives of users harder.

Why? I feel that sounds the same as saying that every time a person submits their opinion, it makes listeners get confused. Diversity makes a nice environment, even if it is a waste of time. But I cannot pay everyone (or want to hire anyone). So I cannot administer their time.

> If Debian can have the linux-libre kernel from FSFLA (or even the use
> of the standard Debian kernel without the blobs), and if we can advise
> the users to use only the main repo as much as they can, what is the
> big issue?
> 
> Because if the answer is that Debian does not respect the 4 freedoms
> that is very inaccurate. 
> If is because Debian has (even though is not part of the project) a
> non-free repo, why we don't advise the users about alternatives?

Because people that promote this way do not want to promote the opposite. Debian is not interested in taking sides. Debian collaborates a lot with free software. But we believe we should collaborate more with those that collaborate more by using the most free software. It is not a question of quality but of rights. We understand that others do not think this way. But others must understand the way we think is our right.

> A good effort, that will take less hours than maintain a distro, is to
> create a map that for each package is maintained at debian non-free
> repo, what would be the alternatives?
> Then, if the alternatives are not in the main/contrib repo, one can
> package it.

Most free distro maintainers agree with that. I don't. I cannot collaborate more with someone that collaborates less with me and my route. I do not hinder their efforts. But I will not support a cause a do not agree with.

> As there is a lot of messages/threads on the list about how to start
> acting, I believe that it would be a great step. :)

Thank you for your opinion. I think that someone that has acted does not need guidance but cheers. Hyperbola hackers did not ask for our decision. They just offered their distro. When they ask for our opinion, I will say mine. In the meantime I will cheer them because they are working for free software.

Don't you agree? 

-- 
Example of the problems in top posting:

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

A: No.
Q: Should I leave quotations after my reply?

Saluton,
Quiliro
0987631031