I've been pondering why current FOSS ideals don't really resonate with me and I think I finally have a succinct way to put it.
to me, software freedom means complete unwavering and unconditional support for the user's freedom of choice, with a focus on actual tangible freedoms that result in real-world benefits, rather than abstract ideals and notions of purity. this means putting the user first, even if they choose to use non-free software. interoperate. make stuff work *for* the user.
@gsuberland I don't think it's reasonable to ask any user to install proprietary software, that includes asking developers to do so in order to test/confirm/explore interoperability of their free software with some proprietary software.
The four freedoms are the important bits, yes, but developers are users, first.
@BoydStephenSmithJr if you don't want to be involved in interop then at least have the decency to get out of the way and let others do the work without turning things into a pissing contest about who is the purest foss nerd and who is the evil spawn of satan
@gsuberland
How do you design interop for proprietary software that unsurprisingly refuses to! Can they be made to commit to the ideals of #4opens ?
The point about accessibility may actually be valid, along with UX as lamented elsewhere.
I think GNU/FSF did a great job, that can only be dissed by ignoring the tremendous force that GCC has been. They made many bets that didn't pan out, like Hurd.
GNU may be improved upon, but belittling them is not a good start.
@BoydStephenSmithJr
