search

matrix-org / matrix.to

A simple stateless privacy-protecting URL redirecting service for Matrix
http://matrix.to
Apache License 2.0
886 stars 189 forks source link

Make a pledge to only promote FOSS #307

Open Wuzzy2 opened 1 year ago

Wuzzy2 commented 1 year ago

matrix.to seems to be quite important for the Matrix system right now as it is a central place containing various links to softwares.

Currently, it looks like the only clients that are recommended right now are FOSS. Not a single software appears to be proprietary. Which is great! FOSS for the win! :D

But I'm afraid that once Matrix gets larger, proprietary softwares will eventually appear and try to gain traction and dominate the Internet, thus threatening the vision of a free and open communication system. The point of Matrix goes right of the window if the biggest and most important clients are all proprietary.

I therefore kindly request for the matrix.to project to make a pledge:

That right now and in future, no proprietary Matrix client will ever be recommended or linked to via matrix.to.

This pledge would imply the removal of clients if a proprietary client was added by accident or if one client turns evil (becomes proprietary somehow).

kir68k commented 11 months ago

I'm behind this, although I have to ask, how would this be incorporated into the project? I can think of a LICENSE file which doesn't exist that would contain the Apache-2.0 template with added information about this.

I have to wonder though, if a project like this used e.g. AGPLv3, wouldn't this be required?

Wuzzy2 commented 11 months ago

My proposal is just about pledge, a promise. It's nothing formal. I think it can be incorporated by a simple text file or something. That is, if the pledge is actually serious.

Of course, this needs agreement and discussion first. If the maintainers are not behind this, it is pointless to make such a pledge, obviously.

I just want to get more people behind the idea to take FOSS seriously because I believe in a free and open Internet.

Wuzzy2 commented 11 months ago

Oh, and another thing, to clarify: This issue has nothing to do about licenses. It's more about policy than anything else. Licensing is an entire different discussion.

kir68k commented 11 months ago

I understand. I thought of incorporating it into a license for more strictness, for a lack of better words, but that seems too radical if the idea is primarily a promise. Would be nice if there was a larger discussion about this idea :)

I just want to get more people behind the idea to take FOSS seriously because I believe in a free and open Internet.

I fully agree.