[Dev] Fwd: Re: Article: Chromium's subtle freedom flaws

fauno fauno at endefensadelsl.org
Thu Mar 30 04:27:12 GMT 2017

Isaac David <isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info> writes:

> I think _little_ or _much_ evidence aren't the right quantifiers to
> approach this issue. a single piece of evidence would suffice, whether
> for Chromium or any other software. also, we should be cautious not to
> redefine things in order to spare their faults; that would simply beg
> the question of whether software foo is guilty of bar or not. along
> those lines, was the upcoming article even supposed to touch on
> Qt-WebEngine?

i think it's not a question of evidence at all, but of who is going to
produce a completely libre source tarball of chromium for parabola and
others to build on...  sometimes it's just too much work!  other times i
feel people talks like it isn't on anybody's hands to do it, the "can't
someone else do it?" attitude a diy distro shouldn't see often :)

(i won't argue if removing chromium from kde packages was more or less
time consuming than producing such tarball, since i wasn't involved nor
even remotely interested in the freedomness of chromium)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 617 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20170330/b26be964/attachment.sig>

More information about the Dev mailing list