Re: GNU C Library as its own CNA?

[Alexandre Oliva <oliva@gnu.org>]

On Sep  6, 2023, Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh@gotplt.org> wrote:

> On 2023-09-06 14:35, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> I hope someone with access to that organization can pass on this
>> constructive criticism and recommend them to drop this self-defeating
>> requirements from their web pages, so that we can consider joining as a
>> CNA, whether as a package or as a project.

> Are you implying that the decision to become a CNA (or not) has to be
> taken by the GNU maintainers and that volunteers from the glibc 
> community cannot self-organize and do that?

No, that would be reading too much into what I wrote about an earlier
attempt to make GNU a CNA.

I'd just be surprised if anyone serious about software freedom and
security would seriously consider engaging with that web site while it
remains detrimental to both of these concerns.

If we can find people who don't mind interacting with it as it is, I
suppose we might, but there might be continuity challenges, and, having
been denied access to the site because of javascrippling, I don't even
know how much of a commitment by any community it would amount to.

I expect finding people who care about freedom and security but don't
mind interacting with that website to be difficult, so that is a point
of concern for me.

If we do find a path forward, however, it would be useful to extend it
to all of GNU, because there was much interest, we just couldn't figure
out a way to make interaction viable.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva, happy hacker                    https://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo/
   Free Software Activist                           GNU Toolchain Engineer
Disinformation flourishes because many people care deeply about injustice but
very few check the facts.  Think Assange & Stallman.  The empires strike back