Re: [Introspector-developers] Introspector Status Report 18 Nov. 2002

[Stephen C. <ru...@si...>]

James Michael DuPont wrote:
> The sourceforge server has been down for a move, and I have been in
> contact with the debian-sf (debian sourceforge) project about finding a
> new host. The server objectweb. http://debian-sf.objectweb.org/ might
> be a possible new home, if not savannah itself.

Sorry to pipe in here, but this has been sitting in my head for some 
time. As the FSF has been in some cases hostile to your project, James, 
in my observation at least, it would be an excellent challenge to 
Savannah's intended role in the community to add Introspector to its 
project rolls.

To explain: as I recall, Savannah was originally created in response to 
the "closing" of SF, as well as to answer the need for a free-software 
community counterpart to the OSI-community's SF. GNU, as the host, is of 
course allowed to lay out the ground rules for such a system (GNU in/not 
in project name, GPL-compatible licensing, etc.). However, to allow a 
free community of various projects, it must be willing to accept those 
projects that do not seem to be in line with goals elsewhere in the GNU 
organization; namely, the GCC project. (Though this has changed, no?)

So the offering of the Introspector project proposal to Savannah might 
prove interesting. It might offer Savannah a chance to show whether it 
was for the community, or whether it would be susceptible to the whims 
of GNU leaders. A political test case for Savannah, if you will.

Personally, I feel that they will demonstrate the former. Then again, I 
am usually confident that GNU is doing/will do the right thing.

-- 
Stephen Compall
Also known as S11001001
DotGNU `Contributor' -- http://dotgnu.org

Richard, you know, you and I are the two guys who didn't make any
money out of this revolution.
	-- Eben Moglen to RMS