15

http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com

One of the reasons free operating systems are so great is because of their bug reporting features. Ubuntu is no exception. Like most other GNU/Linux operating systems, Ubuntu allows users to file bug reports using its bug reporting site, Launchpad. In the free software world, each user becomes a potential beta tester and gets the chance to contribute to the community without ever coding or writing documentation. Unfortunately, Launchpad’s bug reporting tool often scares away users who have no idea what a ticket, project, or distribution is.

Full story »
tony's picture
Created by tony 6 years 29 weeks ago – Made popular 6 years 29 weeks ago
Category: End User   Tags:
pravi's picture

pravi

6 years 29 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago

-1

Launchpad is not Free Software

I thought FreeSoftwareMagazine and FSDaily was about discussing Free Software.

Freedom is worth a sacrifice - RMS

hanusclarkson's picture

hanusclarkson

6 years 29 weeks 22 hours 57 min ago

0

Ubuntu is free software

Ubuntu is free software and bug reporting is very valuable to the free software community...so get over it!!

aboutblank's picture

aboutblank

6 years 29 weeks 9 hours 1 min ago

1

Is Launchpad a computer

Is Launchpad a computer program you can install on your computer? If Launchpad is a web service and not a sharable computer program, I do not see how it can be non-free.

pravi's picture

pravi

6 years 29 weeks 54 min 51 sec ago

2
pravi's picture

pravi

6 years 29 weeks 2 hours 49 min ago

2

Do you know how Ubuntu started?

Ubuntu started from Debian. It is standing on the shoulders of Debian. And you know what is the most basic thing about Free Software, that prompted RMS to start Free Software movement? It is the ability to cooperate with others.

Why can't Debian, Gentoo and so many other distributions can't use and improve launchpad. Did you hear about bugzilla? It is a Free Software replacement to launchpad like Gimp is a replacement to Photoshop. Are we going to post about Photoshop in Free Software Magazine because it is more powerful than Gimp or it is developed by Adobe who also support a Free Standard (PDF)?

Non-Free Software is Non-Free no matter who develops it and what other things he does. Do you know how much money Bill Gates spends for helping poor? Does that make Windows Vista Free?

What is web service? It is just another computer program served by a computer. Are we going to start posting about all the web services? Lets start with Gmail, Facebook, MySpace... Gmail helps free software a lot because email is such an essential component of Free Software collaboration. How does that sounds?

Ubuntu and Canonical has every "legal right" (moral right is another thing, especially for a company which shouts about Free Software) to decide whether to make it Free Software or not. The point is why is this post any better than a post about Windows Vista?

When we have a community that believes non-free software is OK, we are weakening ourselves. If you are not valuing your freedom you can easily lose it.

Freedom is worth a sacrifice - RMS

aboutblank's picture

aboutblank

6 years 29 weeks 2 hours 10 min ago

-1

Launchpad is not on your computer

Launchpad is not running on my computer and so, it doesn't limit my right to tinker with the software that is running on my computer. Launchpad is not installed on my computer and so, it doesn't limit my right to share the computer programs that are running on my computer. Launchpad is running on someone else's computer.

If Launchpad was running on your computer, you should demand the right to run and tinker with the program. If Launchpad was running on your computer, you should demand the right to share unmodified and modified copies of the program. But Launchpad is not running on your computer.

Other distribution project can't use and improve Launchpad because Launchpad is not installed on their systems. Launchpad is only installed in Canonical's system.

pravi's picture

pravi

6 years 29 weeks 57 min 6 sec ago

2
pravi's picture

pravi

6 years 29 weeks 2 hours 38 min ago

1

Food and education is essential for poor children in Africa

And Bill Gates spends a lot of money for this. Does that make Windows Free Software?

Ubuntu includes non-free software and it has no commitment to remain Free Software. If you look at ubuntu website they will tell you "Ubuntu will always be free of charge, including enterprise releases and security updates."

If that is what your concept of Free Software then I have nothing more to add.

"And they call these things "value-added packages", which makes a statement about their values. They're saying: Value practical convenience, not freedom. And, I don't agree with those values, so I call them "freedom-subtracted packages". [Laughter] Because if you have installed a free operating system, then you now are living in the free world. You enjoy the benefits of liberty that we worked for so many years to give you. Those packages give you an opportunity to buckle on a chain."

http://www.gnu.org/events/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.html

"you’re “a little bit non-free” is akin to saying you’re “a little bit pregnant.” Close doesn’t count, and even if people don’t notice the difference today, they’ll definitely notice it nine months from now."

http://diveintomark.org/archives/2006/11/06/gnewsense

Freedom is worth a sacrifice - RMS

knowing-card's picture

knowing-card

6 years 29 weeks 1 hour 21 min ago

0

Changing the subject?

Until you did, no one had mentioned adding non-free software to an Ubuntu install. Until you did, no one had mentioned the idea Windows being free based on whether BG gives money away to the poor.

It sounds as though aboutblank has proven you wrong pravi and now you seem to be changing the subject. :P

pravi's picture

pravi

6 years 29 weeks 1 hour 3 min ago

3

So you believe Ubuntu is 100% Free Software?

They not only include non-free software but they advertise it as their advantage.

"And what's more come with DVD playback pre-loaded."
http://www.ubuntu.com/dell

Freedom is worth a sacrifice - RMS

knowing-card's picture

knowing-card

6 years 28 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago

2

Hang on just a second!

What dell does with Ubuntu on their machines is not Ubuntu. When I download Ubuntu and go to play DVDs it doesn't work until I install the codecs.

If Dell installs them on their machines that's up to them. You can't start claiming Ubuntu is proprietary because of what Dell does.

pravi's picture

pravi

6 years 28 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago

0

Ubuntu website advertise non-free software as an advantage

So you are telling me what Ubuntu publish on their website is not what we should believe?

When you buy Dell, what you get pre installed is also Ubuntu.

Freedom is worth a sacrifice - RMS

pravi's picture

pravi

6 years 29 weeks 1 hour 13 min ago

6

Why is Canonical refusing to share Launchpad with others?

You can understand if Microsoft is doing it, because they don't believe in Free Software or collaborating with others. But what about Canonical, they claim they are a Free Software company and when they develop something if they are not following principle's of Free Software how can we trust them?

And most importantly why should the community support some one who refuse to collaborate with the community?

`(FSF),explained that the Free Software Movement built this community of cooperation in 1984, by developing the GNU operating system. “We did this for the sake of freedom—specifically, the freedom to cooperate.

http://playingwithsid.blogspot.com/2008/01/understanding-free-software-p...

Now when you participate in Ubuntu development it becomes your tool (well I don't know about Ubuntu but that is how it works in Free Software projects). GNOME developers install and maintain bugzilla software for bug tracking. Now if they find some bugs in bugzilla what can they do? Since it is Free Software they can collaborate with bugzilla developers and improve it, which is not possible for launchpad. You may request it and if they are kind enough they may fix it, just like proprietary software.

It is similar to a non-free compiler. Why should you use gcc? Why can't you use Microsoft Visual C compiler for developing application? You are never going to change the compiler and you can release your application as Free Software. Now if every bug tracker is proprietary how will Free Software projects benefits from it? Do we want something that is beneficial to the whole Free Software community or do we want something that is beneficial to a company which claims to support Free Software but does not believe it is the right way when _they_ write the code. It is like "we support Free Software because we can take the fruits of everyone's hard work but we don't want anyone to get benefit from our work."

When there are projects and companies which give everything they create back to the community why should we advertise/support someone who shows their back to the community?

Freedom is worth a sacrifice - RMS

knowing-card's picture

knowing-card

6 years 29 weeks 1 hour 3 min ago

0

That's more like it

Now that's more like it. +1 for your comment.

PS: I don't know if you know this but you can reply to comments by hitting the reply link under whichever comment you want to reply to. Then the comments end up nested in threads.

pravi's picture

pravi

6 years 29 weeks 1 hour 1 min ago

0

I just did that

:-)

Freedom is worth a sacrifice - RMS

aboutblank's picture

aboutblank

6 years 28 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago

2

We should care about the

We should care about the programs that run on our own systems and not on other people. Try reading this article.
http://www.wizards-of-os.org/archiv/wos_1/proceedings/panels/5_open_sour...

I will hope you think about this quote by RMS from that article.
> Now when you apply this criterion to things like web servers that answer certain kinds of questions for you, that communicate with you, you find an interesting thing: a proprietary program on a web server that somebody else is running limits his freedom perhaps, but it doesn't limit your freedom or my freedom. We don't have that program on our computers at all, and in fact the issue of free software versus proprietary arises for software that we're going to have on our computers and run on our computers. We're gonna have copies and the question is, what are we allowed to do with those copies? Are we just allowed to run them or are we allowed to do the other useful things that you can do with a program? If the program is running on somebody else's computer, the issue doesn't arise. Am I allowed to copy the program that Amazon has on it's computer? Well, I can't, I don't have that program at all, so it doesn't put me in a morally compromised position, the way I would be if I were supposed to have a program on my computer and the law says I can't give you a copy when you come visit me. That really puts me on the spot morally. If a proprietary program is on Amazon's computer, that's Amazon's conscience. Now I would like them to have freedom too. I hope they will want freedom, and they will work with me so that we all get freedom, but it's not directly an attack on you and me if Amazon has a proprietary program on their computer. It's not crucially important to you and me whether Amazon uses a free operating system like GNU plus Linux, or a free web server like Apache. I mean I hope they will, I hope free software will be popular, but if they give up their freedom, that's just a shame it's not a danger to us who want freedom.

pravi's picture

pravi

6 years 28 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago

0

It is just a shame it's not a danger to us

In the same way we don't publish stories about Amazon.com's software this is not the right place to talk about a non-free program (launchpad)

Freedom is worth a sacrifice - RMS

kiba's picture

kiba

6 years 28 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago

0

Forcing people to share

Forcing people to share softwares is not freedom.

I will not share the operating system and all the software I am running(which is of course, all free softwares).

Sharing may be a virtue, but it should be voluntary.

Moral duty in free software only come into play when we distribute the software. In this case, Canonical didn't distribute it.

pravi's picture

pravi

6 years 28 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago

1

It is all about being on topic

I have already mentioned they have all the legal right not to share it, as long as they don't share it, it is not Free Software, and we should not be discussing it here. May be digg or slashdot have been a better place. I thought FSDaily was about Free Software News, or did it change now to popular software?

Designing icons for Free Software is a good thing, but does that make an article about Photoshop fit to report in FSDaily?

Freedom is worth a sacrifice - RMS

knowing-card's picture

knowing-card

6 years 28 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago

1

Do you have another way?

Canonical can choose whatever way they like to allow bugs to be reported. That is THEIR choice, it doesn't restrict Ubuntu users freedom, and it DOES NOT make Ubuntu proprietary software.

I see no reason not to include articles on fsdaily that teach people how to report bugs FOR free software. Ubuntu users have no choice over what software Canonical choose to use for reporting bugs. And before you start arguing that they should have a choice: since when are end users ever given a choice by any distro maintainer in regard to what software they use for reporting bugs. They don't have multiple options; they have the one option the maintainers provide.

Your example of designing icons is inappropriate. 1) End users do not design icons on another company's servers. 2) End users have a choice over what software they use for designing icons. Due to these points, we should only submit stories to fsdaily about the free software options.

Ubuntu (free software) users need to know how to submit bugs so that the (free) software they use can be improved by the (free software) community and by the (free software) maintainers. Sounds like a free software story to me. The fact that they do it using software which is not distributed at all and is only installed on the maintainers servers should not stop the story from being free software related (enough).

Oh and can you clear something up for me too: are you trying to say that Ubuntu is not free software and therefore nothing about Ubuntu should be submitted to/voted up on fsdaily? If that is the case you really are wasting your breath. That ain't gonna stop.

pravi's picture

pravi

6 years 28 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago

0

It does not make Launchpad Free Software either

My objection is to publishing a story about using a non-free software. I said earlier Ubuntu is not 100% Free Software, and I stick to it, or do you think Ubuntu is 100% free software? I did not object to any stories that talks about using _Ubuntu_ and I don't now as well. The objection is about a story that talks about a software (no matter what it is a service or not) that is non-free, in FreeSoftwareDaily. As I said earlier, it would have been on-topic for digg or slashdot. And stories about using _Ubuntu_ is on topic as well (I did not contest that). In the Free Software community the distinction between end user and developer is shallow.

Freedom is worth a sacrifice - RMS

knowing-card's picture

knowing-card

6 years 28 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago

0

That's just not going to work sorry

> I said earlier Ubuntu is not 100% Free Software, and I stick to it, or do you think Ubuntu is 100% free software? I did not object to any stories that talks about using _Ubuntu_ and I don't now as well.

Sorry that doesn't make any sense. You object to software that isn't 100% free, you think that Ubuntu isn't 100% free but you don't object to Ubuntu articles?!?!?

It is very necessary to the free software community to be able to report bugs and to be shown how if they don't know. this site is supposed to be for news and articles for the free software community. If the free software community benefit from this article then it is appropriate. And they DO benefit because they learn to report bugs (regardless of what software is used to do it) for a free software OS.

> In the Free Software community the distinction between end user and developer is shallow.

I can't back this up with stats but I would imagine that well over 90% of the Ubuntu community are _just_ end users who wouldn't dream of developing. So I think you are wrong there. "Shallower" maybe, but not "shallow".

pravi's picture

pravi

6 years 28 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago

2

Commitment to the values is important than popularity

Most of the Ubuntu articles are about Free Software and distro just happened to be Ubuntu, but it would be true for any other distro as well. Not only launchpad specific to Ubuntu but it is 100% non-free.

How can we tell people to use non-free software when we don't do it ourselves? How can we tell people to write Free Software when we don't do it ourselves?

Freedom is worth a sacrifice - RMS

kiba's picture

kiba

6 years 28 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago

1

I write free softwares and I

I write free softwares and I tell people not to use non-free software.

However, I already mentioned in other posts that sharing should be voluntary, or otherwise it is not freedom.

pravi's picture

pravi

6 years 28 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago

0

Should we advertise non-free software?

I agree sharing should be voluntary, but the issue here is promoting non-free software (launchpad) in FSDaily.

Freedom is worth a sacrifice - RMS

Starchild's picture

Starchild

6 years 28 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago

3

SAAS

Well technically speaking Launchpad is not even released yet so it can't be considered proprietary in the usual sense of the word. But since people do use it as a service it evokes the same arguments that eventually led to the creation of the GNU AGPL.

It's a tough rope to walk since as well as the usual issue of freedom and trust on the part of the end user there is also the issue of privacy and security on the part of the service provider. I believe that's what led the FSF to eventually devise a new license to tackle this issue instead just amending the GPL.