Hi, Carsten!
Am 2018-06-14 um 12:06 schrieb Carsten Agger:
I'd limit the scope as such:
- We're talking of the software used by *the association* as part of its
*operations*, i.e. not about the personal choices of employees or volunteers in their spare time.
- We're talking about software used by the organization in its *own*
operations - not that of vendors and other third parties (e.g., designers and accountants - if the designer prefers to use Gimp for images that's fine, but they *are* a third party)
- We're talking about *tools*, i.e. mostly userspace software. We should
include proprietary JavaScript - so using Twitter or Google is not "using proprietary software" because the service is proprietary, but because they use non-free JavaScript (I mention this to align with the FSF's position). Anything proprietary installed on staff computers for work purposes would be listed, e.g. Skype, if someone were using that (which I have reasons to believe is not the case)
- We're not talking about firmware.
That sounds like a reasonable scope to me, except for JavaScript, which I would regard debatable. And if I am not mistaken, apart from JavaScript, FSFE does not use any proprietary software within this scope. Actually I'm not even sure about JavaScript, since the services you mention might also run with JavaScript turned off.
No proprietary software runs on any of FSFE's servers in userspace, and of course all software developed by FSFE staff or by contractors paid by FSFE is free software.
Anything further doesn't seem very reasonable to me: I would, for example, not want our volunteers to spend their time with documenting which web pages they visited where JavaScript was required.
Thanks,