Re: Concerning uniliateral decision making with respect to the coreutils package

Peter Pentchev dijo [Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 03:26:46PM +0300]:
>> I believe that having a (largely) strongly copyleft OS is part of a
>> defence against commercial/government subjugations.
>>
>> Replacing strongly copyleft software with permissively licensed software
>> leads towards a different path, and with OpenBSD/FreeBSD/NetBSD around I
>> don't believe Debian should compete with that.  I fear there could even
>> be a majority among voting DD's who believe the opposite today, though.
>> That's part of why we are seeing these efforts to replace GnuPG with
>> Seqoia, CoreUtils with UUtils, wget with (w)curl, and so on for
>> generally anything GNU-licensed with anything BSD/Expat-licensed.
>
>I can't speak for anyone but myself, so this is only my personal view,
>not that of any large project, but for me, the effort to replace GnuPG
>with Sequoia in my workflows (personal and workplace) was motivated only
>by three things: the historical baggage GnuPG has accumulated
>WRT command-line syntax, the OpenPGP/LibrePGP schism, and the hoops one
>has to go through to use it in an unattended setting. Yes, it is possible.
>Yes, I have done it. Yes, it is much, much easier with SOP/sqop.


     ++        11    
     ++       111    
++++++++++    11    
++++++++++    11    
     ++        11    
     ++      111111

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEABYIAB0WIQRgswk9lhCOXLlxQu/i9jtDU/RZiQUCalUx3QAKCRDi9jtDU/RZ
iWaoAQDg1UydbxSTZ0OsKCtiFCg2bqq3LPMX0ab9cGwlHqf5BAEAmWMsNA378lZB
Tsl1fPl7Cc57p/POoKE29+F6FJbyIw0=
=nM5s
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----