[Dev] SFC

Tiberiu C. Turbureanu tct at ceata.org
Fri Dec 19 08:19:08 GMT 2014

On 19.12.2014 02:25, hellekin wrote:
> On 12/18/2014 05:36 PM, Tiberiu C. Turbureanu wrote:
>> Finally, if joining as an autonomous project in an organization is the
>> way the project decides to go for, Fundația Ceata is willing to help
>> Parabola. From my point of view as free software activist, founder and
>> president of Ceata, Parabola should join a free software oriented
>> organization like Ceata. Both SFC and SPI host nonfree distributions.
> *** Thank you for your generous offer, Tiberiu.
> I didn't offer this suggestion for Parabola to "join" anything,

Actually, your friend and you did use the word "join" and this is why I
used it:

On 17.12.2014 04:16, hellekin wrote:
> A friend of mine suggested that Parabola could join the
> http://sfconservancy.org/ to benefit from their infrastructure and help.

This is the term used by SFC, too:

"Applying to Join Conservancy as a Member Project"

> but to
> be able to accept transparent institutional support for taking care of
> an expressed need to support full-time dedication to the project and/or
> compensate people's work.

Ceata has no intention and will not take or pretend credit for Parabola
project, if you accept our institutional support.

> At any rate, I would recommend against *joining* anything.  

The only reason I used "join" is because you proposed this term to
describe the idea. And two project members thumbed up the idea as you
formulated it.

> I'd like to
> see volunteer sponsors take care of part of the costs of maintenance of
> the community, including some living costs of developers so that they
> can spend more time on the project instead of having to work on
> unrelated things--again, because that was an expressed need.

If you decide to collaborate with Ceata, every donation marked Parabola
or claimed for Parabola will get to your project, this is a guarantee.

> Anyway I think there are processes to be invented here, especially to
> keep the community's independence, etc.  

It's true that if Parabola will accept Ceata's instutional support,
Parabola will have even more visibility in our community and more of our
volunteers will contribute to Parabola (like Sorin - smv - used to).

However, in order to guarantee you Ceata has no hidden agenda, I propose
we put in our agreement that as long Ceata offers institutional support
to Parabola, *no* Ceata member who is also a Parabola contributor can
have vote in the Parabola project.

> Another way to explore would be
> to have people hired by companies for working on Parabola, without any
> connection to the companies' profit stream.  That might sound
> impossible, but keep in mind rich companies host foundations, buy art,
> etc., just for the sake of their image.  The double advantage of using
> SFC, SPI, or Fundatia Ceata, is first that they're more ethically
> aligned with the project than corporations, and second, that they
> already took care of getting the funds and can allocate them without or
> with less influence from their corporate or institutional sponsors.

SFC and SPI are not completely aligned to the free software philosophy
of the GNU project, but Ceata is and Richard Stallman is the icon of
Ceata's conference where he accepted the title of honorific member of
Ceata in June this year.

Both SFC and SPI uses the terms "Free, Libre, and Open Source Software"
(FLOSS), "open source and free software", and "free and open source
software" (FOSS), but never only "free software".

Both SFC and SPI have nonfree GNU/Linux distributions as member projects:

"Foresight Linux" @SFC: http://sfconservancy.org/members/current/

Debian, "Arch Linux", Chakra:  @SPI: http://spi-inc.org/projects/

I hope you don't decide to join Arch and Chakra (based on Arch) at SPI,
because you are fully free distribution based on Arch. I think you
should keep separated from the parent nonfree distribution and accept
support from an ethical organization aligned with the free software
philosophy, the same gNewSense has form FSF. SFC also supports a nonfree
distribution, but I believe Ceata is a good fit for Parabola.

Here gNewSense is listed as "a GNU/Linux distribution based on Debian,
with sponsorship from the FSF".


It would be nice to add the following to Parabola, in recognition of our
help, if you decide to accept it:

"Parabola GNU/Linux, a distribution based on Arch that prioritizes
simple package and system management, with institutional support from
Fundația Ceata".

What do you think?

Tiberiu C. Turbureanu
Președinte, Fundația Ceata

Susții libertatea artelor și tehnologiilor?
Înscrie-te ca membru: http://ceata.org/%C3%AEnscrieri

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20141219/280d9649/attachment.sig>

More information about the Dev mailing list