Difference between revisions of "User talk:Mmcmahon"

From Free Software Directory
Jump to: navigation, search
(krey being annoyed by people mangling his words and will flip if they mangle his name again)
(Add response.)
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
== Consider undo the replacement of non-libre to online ==
 
== Consider undo the replacement of non-libre to online ==
  
In https://directory.fsf.org/wiki?title=Free_Software_Directory:Backlog_active&diff=82495&oldid=82494 i believe that replacing `non-libre` with `online` changes the meaning and makes the presentation confusing as:
+
In https://directory.fsf.org/wiki?title=Free_Software_Directory:Backlog_active&diff=82495&oldid=82494 I believe that replacing `non-libre` with `online` changes the meaning and makes the presentation confusing as:
  
 
'''
 
'''
Line 9: Line 9:
 
May be seen as not being concerned about proprietary and non-libre service providers which is the main concern provided assuming possibly superior alternatives provided by the libre community.
 
May be seen as not being concerned about proprietary and non-libre service providers which is the main concern provided assuming possibly superior alternatives provided by the libre community.
  
Consider undo or rephrase, --[[User:Kreyren|Kreyren]] ([[User talk:Kreyren|talk]]) 16:47, 21 November 2020 (EST)
+
Consider undo or rephrase, --[[User:Kreyren|Kreyren]] ([[User talk:Kreyren|talk]]) 22:47, 21 November 2020 (CET)
 +
: Non-libre services is a confusing phrase.  Most websites and services use free software under the hood, but only some licenses (like AGPLv) urge the maintainer to publish the code.  For an example, would a website that uses freely licensed JavaScript, GPLv2 frameworks, and a free software web server on a GNU/Linux distribution that does not publish the source code be libre?  The concept is of verifying services is a good one, but would be technically very challenging and is probably out of scope for the FSD.  [[User:mmcmahon|mmcmahon]] ([[User talk:mmcmahon|talk]]) 12:44, 23 November 2020 (EDT)
  
 
== Git clone command ==
 
== Git clone command ==

Revision as of 12:44, 23 November 2020

Consider undo the replacement of non-libre to online

In https://directory.fsf.org/wiki?title=Free_Software_Directory:Backlog_active&diff=82495&oldid=82494 I believe that replacing `non-libre` with `online` changes the meaning and makes the presentation confusing as:

I've observed that currently one of the major issues in libre community is that end-users are unaware of libre alternatives to online services...

May be seen as not being concerned about proprietary and non-libre service providers which is the main concern provided assuming possibly superior alternatives provided by the libre community.

Consider undo or rephrase, --Kreyren (talk) 22:47, 21 November 2020 (CET)

Non-libre services is a confusing phrase. Most websites and services use free software under the hood, but only some licenses (like AGPLv) urge the maintainer to publish the code. For an example, would a website that uses freely licensed JavaScript, GPLv2 frameworks, and a free software web server on a GNU/Linux distribution that does not publish the source code be libre? The concept is of verifying services is a good one, but would be technically very challenging and is probably out of scope for the FSD. mmcmahon (talk) 12:44, 23 November 2020 (EDT)

Git clone command

Hi Michael,

Please, don't remove the .git extension. It's the official syntax for all protocols, both on Savannah, GitLab and GitHub… Genium (talk) 01:05, 3 October 2020 (EDT)

If the git clone command understands without .git at the end for all https clones, I see it as unnecessary extra bits and typing. I will not make any more of these changes, but I did test with Savannah, GitLab, and GitHub. mmcmahon (talk) 11:33, 5 October 2020 (EDT)


Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.3 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the page “GNU Free Documentation License”.

The copyright and license notices on this page only apply to the text on this page. Any software or copyright-licenses or other similar notices described in this text has its own copyright notice and license, which can usually be found in the distribution or license text itself.