@mangeurdenuage The issue was github and a release tarball that was purporting to be source code, but actually had proprietary software binaries slipped in.
Free distro maintainers tend to actually check claimed source code for binaries and determine if there is source for such binaries, or if the binaries are proprietary and remove them if so.
@Suiseiseki@mangeurdenuage i'd be interested in watching that video if it finds its way to :peertube:PeerTube but the summary and dialogue were sufficient. Thanks.
long live foss and wish all a very festive, foss-filled christmas
@frogzone >long live foss and wish all a very festive, foss-filled christmas I have sworn to GNU/Jihad against "FOSS" and all other forms of proprietary degeneracy.
@frogzone >(i thought "FOSS" encompassed copyleft but i may stand corrected) "FOSS" was only intended to be a neutral between free software and "open source", but it even fails to be neutral, as almost all people assume it means gratis, source available software.
@frogzone The entire concept of "open source" is not about respecting freedom, so it doesn't belong there, but that could be freedom-respecting software "FRS", which is shorter too.