[GNU-linux-libre] Fwd: [gnu.org #1308285] add uruk gnu/linux to free list

[a***@riseup.net]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [gnu.org #1308285] add uruk gnu/linux to free list
Date: 2018-07-18 09:39

I Talked with you for more than once a long time ago.
But not a real result
Maybe it's just my luck
That I got less than what I bargained for
Please help me
What about add uruk gnu/linux to the free list??????
today I Saw this page
https://libreplanet.org/wiki?title=Incoming_distros
have fun and be free
aliimiracle

Hello Ali,

Unfortunately, webmasters can't do anything about this.
Their only part in this process is to forward applications
after checking that they are relevant. This was done long
ago. You should write to <gnu-linux-***@gnu.org> again,
and remind them that Uruk should be listed on the wiki.

Best regards,
Thérèse

[bill-auger]

GNU webmaster - can you please confirm the quoted message below

Once the webmasters have completed their initial check, they will send the distro to the Workgroup for fully free GNU/Linux distributions mailing list for a full review.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [gnu.org #1308285] add uruk gnu/linux to free list
Date: 2018-07-18 09:39

I Talked with you for more than once a long time ago.
But not a real result
Maybe it's just my luck
That I got less than what I bargained for
Please help me
What about add uruk gnu/linux to the free list??????
today I Saw this page
https://libreplanet.org/wiki?title=Incoming_distros
have fun and be free
aliimiracle

Hello Ali,
Unfortunately, webmasters can't do anything about this.
Their only part in this process is to forward applications
after checking that they are relevant. This was done long
and remind them that Uruk should be listed on the wiki.
Best regards,
Thérèse

[Therese Godefroy via RT]

Post by bill-auger
GNU webmaster - can you please confirm the quoted message below

I confirm.

Post by bill-auger
according to the new distro evaluation protocol, the GNU webmaster is
expected to write to this 'gnu-linux-libre' list confirming the
graduation to the community evaluation stage - i will CC this message

The last thread about Uruk on gnu-linux-libre@ was in January 2018.
It was in the middle of a very fuzzy discussion about unmaintained
distros, so you may have overlooked Ali's messages.

From what I can see on Uruk's website, this distro is alive and well,
and claims to be entirely free. Checking whether it is really free is
your job, not the webmasters'.

By the way, I wonder what webmasters have to do in this process,
except acting as spam filter.

Best,
Thérèse

[...]

[Jason Self]

There may be a misunderstanding then Thérèse; the GNU Webmastering
Guidelines had never asked for the Webmasters themselves to write to
the list. https://www.gnu.org/server/standards/#distros
#3 has that the requestor (not the Webmasters) write to the list after
the Webmasters have verified (in #1) that the people requesting are the
primary developers and (in #2) briefly checked that the distro is a
feasible candidate.

By the way, I wonder what webmasters have to do in this 
process, except acting as spam filter.

That is effectively it, yes: To make sure that the people asking for
the endorsement are the right people, since only the primary developers
can request endorsement -- the users of the distro should be referred
back to the primary developers -- and to filter out distros that
clearly (based on only a brief examination) won't qualify.

[Therese Godefroy via RT]

Post by Jason Self
There may be a misunderstanding then Thérèse;

If there was a misunderstanding, it was not on my part. Please
check my last message to Ali; I clearly told him he had to
contact gnu-linux-libre himself. And if I remember correctly
this is what he did one year ago, and again 6 months ago... to
no avail. My dealings with this list had to do with another
ticket.

Post by Jason Self
the GNU Webmastering
Guidelines had never asked for the Webmasters themselves to write to
the list. https://www.gnu.org/server/standards/#distros
#3 has that the requestor (not the Webmasters) write to the list after
the Webmasters have verified (in #1) that the people requesting are the
primary developers and (in #2) briefly checked that the distro is a
feasible candidate.

Why don't you write this clearly in the webmastering guidelines?

Post by Jason Self

By the way, I wonder what webmasters have to do in this 
process, except acting as spam filter.

That is effectively it, yes: To make sure that the people asking for
the endorsement are the right people, since only the primary developers
can request endorsement -- the users of the distro should be referred
back to the primary developers -- and to filter out distros that
clearly (based on only a brief examination) won't qualify.

And this too. It may be useful to explain what you mean by "a brief
examination".

Best,
Thérèse

[Jean Louis]

Post by Therese Godefroy via RT

Post by Jason Self
There may be a misunderstanding then Thérèse;

If there was a misunderstanding, it was not on my part. Please
check my last message to Ali; I clearly told him he had to
contact gnu-linux-libre himself. And if I remember correctly
this is what he did one year ago, and again 6 months ago... to
no avail. My dealings with this list had to do with another
ticket.

Maybe Ali is foreign and does not speak English.

This matter would really be easily solved if there
would be ONE responsible person doing the job.

Nobody takes this in the manner of a classic
sale. And that is exactly how these type of
inquiries shall be handled.

Instead of this mess of conversation, there shall
be one individal on side of FSF responsible to
welcome, greet, and help the new applicants for
free system distributions!

And that means, immediately putting the contact
information into the database, calling the
applicant, welcoming the applicant, giving him
necessary resources, downloading the distribution,
verifying the checklist, submitting timely the
work online on pages so that people can see the
progress, and so on, and so on until the
distribution is accepted or need corrections.

So that is the single problem here.

We say too many grandmothers, lazy will be the
grandchild.

Finally, THAT is the reason why GNU project
started, to have free software systems.

Now, there is somebody from Uruk, asking on a
mailing list, and nobody is really handling that
matter.

Guys, don't be bureaucratic.

Get some 50 cents and VoIP SIP account, call the
admin of Uruk GNU/Linux, contact by email, do your
best, assign one person to do the checklist and
have somebody do the final evaluation.

Jean

[Therese Godefroy via RT]

Hello Jean,

On Thu Jul 19 13:22:21 2018, ***@gnu.support wrote:
[...]

Post by Jean Louis
This matter would really be easily solved if there
would be ONE responsible person doing the job.

[...]

Yes, that would be much better.

And there is no good reason to involve webmasters in the
process. In the last 6 months AFAIR, we had 2 irrelevant requests,
2 requests from Uruk users, and 2 from Ali himself. Getting
rid of the irrelevant requests took about 10 min each. I
think the gnu-linux-libre mailing list can handle this much
spam.

Best regards,
Thérèse

[John Sullivan]

Links to free GNU/Linux distributions
The requestors should be the primary developers of the distro, not
just users. If they are users, thank them and ask them to contact
the developers in case they want to be listed.
Briefly check that the distro is a feasible candidate: they should
have a clear policy of only including free software, and it should
be reasonably apparent how to get the sources and what packages are
included. If these things are not present, talk to the requestor
about it (politely).
If there are no glaring problems, ask the requestors to request an
endorsement from the dedicated mailing list
their new distro, a link to their home page, and any other useful
info. Our ticket should then be resolved.
FYI: the gnu-linux-libre list will take over from there. In essence,
they will review it in detail for meeting our criteria, and if all
seems good, pass it on to the FSF licensing person for final
approval.
In any event, webmasters should never simply add new distros that are
said to be free to our list. FSF licensing and RMS must explicitly
approve any addition

GNU webmasters have been very helpful in the past on this, and we'd
appreciate the same process being used going forward.

-john

[Therese Godefroy via RT]

Hi John,

On Thu Jul 19 15:40:58 2018, johns wrote:
[...]

Post by John Sullivan
GNU webmasters have been very helpful in the past on this, and we'd
appreciate the same process being used going forward.
-john

The matter is not whether webmasters are helping people who
are supposed to evaluate distros, but whether the evaluation procedure is helping the teams who are trying to build them.
From what I have read, this procedure looks like an obstacle
course in a dead-end street. Not very helpful for the
prospective free distro maintainers.

Best regards,
Thérèse

[John Sullivan]

Post by Therese Godefroy via RT
Hi John,
[...]

Post by John Sullivan
GNU webmasters have been very helpful in the past on this, and we'd
appreciate the same process being used going forward.
-john

The matter is not whether webmasters are helping people who
are supposed to evaluate distros, but whether the evaluation procedure is helping the teams who are trying to build them.
From what I have read, this procedure looks like an obstacle
course in a dead-end street. Not very helpful for the
prospective free distro maintainers.

Hyperbole won't help here. We just revamped and recommitted to the
distro evaluation process on this list recently. Did you read that
discussion?

We need to give time for the changes we made to work, and not disrupt
things with other changes.

The webmasters screening the initial requests is important to preserving
the signal to noise ratio on this list, which will help review move
along in a more organized fashion, which in turn will help get distros
that should be endorsed, endorsed.

-john

[Therese Godefroy via RT]

On Thu Jul 19 18:52:21 2018, johns wrote:

[...]

Post by John Sullivan
We just revamped and recommitted to the
distro evaluation process on this list recently. Did you read that
discussion?

Yes. For an outsider, it looks like unnecessary complication. But
you big guys probably have your reasons.

Post by John Sullivan
We need to give time for the changes we made to work, and not disrupt
things with other changes.

OK. Let's see how long it takes for things to improve. I'm not sure
webmasters will be of much help; the block is at the other end of
the street.

Th

[bill-auger]

Post by Jason Self
There may be a misunderstanding then Thérèse; the GNU Webmastering
Guidelines had never asked for the Webmasters themselves to write to
the list. https://www.gnu.org/server/standards/#distros

i was referring to step #2 of the new procedure steps on the "Incoming Distros" wiki article

1) The process begins with an application sent to <***@gnu.org> for an initial review. ...
2) Once the webmasters have completed their initial check, they will send the distro to the Workgroup for fully free GNU/Linux distributions mailing list for a full review.
3) Each distro at this point will be assigned an "application manager", ...

clearly, the confusion here is rooted in the ambiguity of: "they will send the distro to the Workgroup" - there is surely little confidence or noise reduction in the distro itself writing to the mailing list declaring: "GNU said so ..." - even if a reference to a GNU webmaster ticket is supplied, it is not verifiable AFAIK because that is not a public issue tracker - i would suggest that the GNU server standards and step #2 of the evanluation protocol be ammended to explicitly require the GNU webmaster who gave the initial approval to confirm that to this mailing list using a gnu.org email address - surely that is not too much extra to ask for the sake of rigour

and i do wish people would stop throwing the "beureacratic" around - the purpose of the new procedure is to ensure that all distros are given fair treatment in a verifiable way by eliminating any blind spots that could invite suspicion of favoritism or discrimination - so if the GNU webmasters are to play an official role in this, then their decisions should be verifiable - yes? - if not, then there is hardly any reason for their involvement

[Therese Godefroy via RT]

i have added an entry for uruk under the "Distros that have requested
consideration" heading

its not uruk
its uruk gnu/linux
When you say
"uruk project" or urukproject
you referring to uruk project
https://urukproject.org
When you say
"uruk gnu/linux"
you referring to uruk Distro
https://urukproject.org/dist
When you say
"uruk " Without additions
you referring to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uruk
so Please name it "uruk gnu/linux"
have fun and be free
alimiracle

Hi Ali,

I'm cc'ing <gnu-linux-***@gnu.org>. They are the ones whom
you should talk to from now on.

All the best,
Thérèse

[bill-auger]

Please name it "uruk gnu/linux"

ok done :)