[Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news

[Paul Kocialkowski]

Le mardi 16 août 2016 à 20:34 +0100, Josh Branning a écrit :
> On 16/08/16 20:14, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> 
> > 
> > I certainly wouldn't mix
> > "respects your freedom" and "the FSF's respect your freedom certification".
> 
> So what would you say instead; that is, for a device that is completely 
> free in software terms, but hasn't been through the FSF's certification 
> process?

"runs with fully free software" means something precise, I don't see any problem
with it. But of course, it doesn't apply here.

> ___________________________________________________________________
> 
> ... Either way, I think the conversation is diverging a bit from your 
> (IMO) completely valid and excellent point that the parabola news 
> article is somewhat misleading, and should really be corrected 
> (especially now that we've realised that we can't even find the pdf of 
> schematics for the EOMA68 when "libre hardware" is mentioned).

Okay so we should try to come up with suggestions for each sentence that I
quoted in the first email, that don't use "freedom-friendly" since the consensus
is to avoid that term.

Any propositions?

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20160817/f3bc9ddb/attachment.sig>