dansup is a user on mastodon.social. You can follow them or interact with them if you have an account anywhere in the fediverse.
If you don't, you can sign up here.
So the GS developer is advocating to switch to pleroma.
@mmn why? I tried to contribute a modern patch several times. What will Stallman think?
@dansup @mmn
well, the main reason why Pleroma isn't a GNU project is because the gnu.io initiative never got the support it needed from the GNU mothership. we believe in AGPL, software freedom and the overall principles of the gnu.io initiative, but if we have to build it ourselves, there's no point in being under the gnu.io umbrella: if we build it ourselves, the only "advantage" to being under the gnu.io umbrella is that others can come in and tell us what to do with the stuff we are building :)
it should also be noted that the GNU project also endorsed Mastodon as a possible replacement when Gargron took it AGPL.
so, I would like to believe that Stallman would be happy that there has been a movement to take back the social web in a way that propagates software freedom; the GNU project isn't the beginning or end of this movement. I also have the understanding that Stallman knows our reasons for this and accepts them.
finally, in my opinion, it's the movement that is important, not where it is located: if we are building our own organization to support the initiatives we are doing with Pleroma, then this is a logistical detail and is ultimately uninteresting and unimportant to the overall mission of propagating software freedom in this space
well, the main reason why Pleroma isn't a GNU project is because the gnu.io initiative never got the support it needed from the GNU mothership. we believe in AGPL, software freedom and the overall principles of the gnu.io initiative, but if we have to build it ourselves, there's no point in being under the gnu.io umbrella: if we build it ourselves, the only "advantage" to being under the gnu.io umbrella is that others can come in and tell us what to do with the stuff we are building :)
it should also be noted that the GNU project also endorsed Mastodon as a possible replacement when Gargron took it AGPL.
so, I would like to believe that Stallman would be happy that there has been a movement to take back the social web in a way that propagates software freedom; the GNU project isn't the beginning or end of this movement. I also have the understanding that Stallman knows our reasons for this and accepts them.
finally, in my opinion, it's the movement that is important, not where it is located: if we are building our own organization to support the initiatives we are doing with Pleroma, then this is a logistical detail and is ultimately uninteresting and unimportant to the overall mission of propagating software freedom in this space
@dansup @mmn
i mean, bluntly, the reason why projects became GNU projects was to leverage the support, social capital and infrastructure GNU could lend them
the GNU.io initiative was a good effort, I applaud them for trying to make moves in this space, but the FSF never made the commitments needed to really make traction here -- we should all be thanking @Gargron for jumpstarting the movement and getting it going again and anybody who disagrees with that analysis is frankly ignorant
Mastodon started the current wave, and while Pleroma was initiated at the same time, I mean, @lain is very obviously not a PR person :)
It is a shame that GNU social is in the state it is, but that's largely because FSF never gave the GNU.io initiative the support it needed -- it didn't understand the initiative, much like it didn't understand DotGNU and what the strategic value of these initiatives are
this is also why I find myself frustrated with the current state of the GNU project -- there have been so many opportunities lost in the battles that actually matter today -- to inaction and lack of support / funding / advocacy / recruitment
i mean, bluntly, the reason why projects became GNU projects was to leverage the support, social capital and infrastructure GNU could lend them
the GNU.io initiative was a good effort, I applaud them for trying to make moves in this space, but the FSF never made the commitments needed to really make traction here -- we should all be thanking @Gargron for jumpstarting the movement and getting it going again and anybody who disagrees with that analysis is frankly ignorant
Mastodon started the current wave, and while Pleroma was initiated at the same time, I mean, @lain is very obviously not a PR person :)
It is a shame that GNU social is in the state it is, but that's largely because FSF never gave the GNU.io initiative the support it needed -- it didn't understand the initiative, much like it didn't understand DotGNU and what the strategic value of these initiatives are
this is also why I find myself frustrated with the current state of the GNU project -- there have been so many opportunities lost in the battles that actually matter today -- to inaction and lack of support / funding / advocacy / recruitment
@dansup @mmn @Gargron @lain
So, for example, you ask him why he does not merge your stuff.
The real question, now that you know the background, you should ask is: what's the point in bothering?
FSF has campaigns about how Windows is bad, but they don't have campaigns about how commercial social media is bad.
The whole point of the gnu.io initiative was that FSF would support it in the same way that they support the main GNU initiatives; that gnu.io would get some campaigns -- but it never happened -- instead, GNU social and LibreFM were developed with basically no attention given to them from the mothership.
So, for example, you ask him why he does not merge your stuff.
The real question, now that you know the background, you should ask is: what's the point in bothering?
FSF has campaigns about how Windows is bad, but they don't have campaigns about how commercial social media is bad.
The whole point of the gnu.io initiative was that FSF would support it in the same way that they support the main GNU initiatives; that gnu.io would get some campaigns -- but it never happened -- instead, GNU social and LibreFM were developed with basically no attention given to them from the mothership.
@kaniini I've tried. He doesn't seem to care about GS anymore. He got mad after I deleted my merge requests after a month, and when they were restored he never did anything.
@dansup
I meant that you asked him in this thread why he doesn't care.
My point is that there's no value in caring. Absolutely none.
The whole point of the GNU.io exercise was that FSF would back it in the same way they back their other initiatives -- that there would be messaging about why Twitter and LastFM should be boycotted.
It never happened: instead, the fediverse itself rose up and took the initiative instead with projects like Mastodon and Pleroma. And while we are figuring out how to work together and also coordinate messaging strategies, we are delivering more impact than GNU.io has ever delivered.
So, there is no motivation other than to walk out of GNU.io and let it stagnate.
I meant that you asked him in this thread why he doesn't care.
My point is that there's no value in caring. Absolutely none.
The whole point of the GNU.io exercise was that FSF would back it in the same way they back their other initiatives -- that there would be messaging about why Twitter and LastFM should be boycotted.
It never happened: instead, the fediverse itself rose up and took the initiative instead with projects like Mastodon and Pleroma. And while we are figuring out how to work together and also coordinate messaging strategies, we are delivering more impact than GNU.io has ever delivered.
So, there is no motivation other than to walk out of GNU.io and let it stagnate.
@pybyte I have, she has merged some of my code.
Now you're getting it: to make the fediverse better, you must make your own path. The FSF isn't going to help you through proper stewardship of gnu.io. :)