Switch issues and CI to GitHub

[Bjørn Mork]

Rosen Penev <rosenp at gmail.com> writes:

> https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria-evaluation.html seems to be
> complete garbage. Seems the higher the criteria, the less users.

Yes, I encourage everyone to read that page. Personally, it made me
worry more about the FSFs definition of freedom than using github...

IMHO, upholding the laws of the national state you operate in is good.
We all know by now that is is possible to define a state as "good",
"bad" or "evil".  But regardless of how you categorize the US, I think
it would be far worse if Github didn't obey US law by complying with
current US sanctions.

Requiring non-free javascript for browser access.  OK, valid point.  But
really?  That battle was lost 20 years ago.  Don't use a browser if you
dislike non-free javascript. Couldn't even find librejs or icecat in
Debian, but that might just be me?

Github tries to be transparent about government takedowns, publishing as
much as they can on https://github.com/github/gov-takedowns . This seems
to be used as an argument against github?  Where do I find the complete
list of government takedonws affecting savannah.gnu.org projects?  There
is none?  Well, THAT worries me.  A lot.

And then we have the big licensing argument. As a GPL project, why
should you care whether the hosting site forces other hosted projects to
use GPL (or other free) licensing?  Which sites deserves the "libre"
label: The site allowing any license, or the site allowing only FSF
approved licenses?  Looks like the FSF "freedom" is pretty limited to
me.



Bjørn