[Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-06-13]: New version for Parabola Social Contract

Luke Shumaker lukeshu at sbcglobal.net
Fri Jun 10 01:49:18 GMT 2016

On Thu, 09 Jun 2016 15:16:14 -0400,
André Silva wrote:
> On 06/09/2016 02:26 AM, Luke Shumaker wrote:
> >  2. Maybe they don't have moral authority to insist on it, but Arch
> >     developers insist on it anyway.  And Parabola maintaining a good
> >     relationship with them is a good idea.
> Yes, you're right in that point, however Parabola is maintaining a good
> relationship with FSF, GNU project and Richard Stallman too and they
> insist we use 'Arch GNU/Linux' instead.

Honestly, I don't think that our good relationship with the FSF, GNU,
or RMS is in any risk.

> Even, i have plans to begin Parabola GNU+Hurd project based on Arch
> GNU+Hurd after my conference about Parabola at FISL17. Otherwise, we
> should clarify points about Free Culture Works in Parabola too and it
> needs work too.
> Therefore our Social Contract needs more points to explains with details
> about those points without contradictions.
> Otherwise, shouldn't all clauses in our Social Contract be revised under
> a lawyer too? Maybe FSF or Fundatia Ceata (through Tiberiu) could help
> us on it.

The Social Contract isn't a legal document.  It is a promise to the
community of we are about.  No need to get a lawyer involved with it.

Not everything we do needs to be part of the Social Contract.  The
Social Contract only needs to include the things that as long as
Parabola still exists, we won't stop doing.

Happy hacking,
~ Luke Shumaker

More information about the Dev mailing list