this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2023
16 points (100.0% liked)
Open Source
30837 readers
700 users here now
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
- !libre_culture@lemmy.ml
- !libre_software@lemmy.ml
- !libre_hardware@lemmy.ml
- !linux@lemmy.ml
- !technology@lemmy.ml
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is why you shouldn't trust Microsoft. People need to start migrating.
So if you don't consider Microsoft being at fault for abusing the trust lied upon them, there is no need to migrate?
Should they have chosen the position to not follow the sanctions as set by the government? Do you think many other commercial GitHub hosting services take the same position?
I mean there are perhaps other reasons to migrate for, but I don't think this is it (unless you are at risk of being applied sanctions to, I suppose, in which case you must).
If you don't plan to host free software, you might not care.
For free software, you might consider GNU's criteria for ethical repositories, under which this would already make the hosting unacceptable due to a violation of C2 (see https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria.en.html). Even if you don't adhere to GNU's definition, you might then ask yourself why your definition of free software allows for more discrimination and whether that is justified.