So, shall we draft an application here or someone want to just do it? :)

I think it's better to do it here, since I have not the expertise to talk in the name of the D* community ^{^}

Well, there is no text to write to apply. It just must be done by someone reponsible for the project leading.
D* can apply here

Done. Will update here once they get back.

Thank you a lot !

I'll improve the D* wiki article on the IDE setup once I have test RubyMine !

Ok people, i'm late, but i asked Dr. Richard Stallman about this, and i got this response:

=====================================================================
David Thompson asserted that it would be a "problem" if you "had to" use only freedom-respecting software to develop Diaspora. That question is a red herring. People don't need the approval of the Diaspora project for what they use privately. If they want to surrender their freedom by privately running a nonfree program, you
could not stop them; normally you would not even know.

The real issue is not what people can use, it is what the Diaspora project endorses and does. To offer people licenses for a proprietary program is more than just an endorsement. It is direct participation in the distribution of that program.

What that says to people is, "Freedom is not important." In the long run, it undermines the love of freedom that would motivate why people to contribute to Diaspora.

I implore the Diaspora project to cease participation in distribution of a nonfree program, and I suggest that those who find that program convenient join in developing a free replacement for it.

Too late, we had a vote. Moreover, we do not obliged anyone to use anything.

If there was a free IDE of quality and the simplicity of JetBrain's, why not. But the most important thing isn't that people strat contributing to Diaspora* more than strictly respecting Guru's voice ?

Could someone point out what is the relevance of Stallman's view to Diaspora? Last time I checked he wasn't involved in the project (and never has been).

Diaspora has never insisted that only Free Software can be used in anything involving Diaspora's software. Indeed, since the first release, it has been possible to install and run Diaspora on Mac OS, which is completely non-free. Diaspora is about freedom in the lower-case (non-Stallman) sense: allowing people to do what they want to do in as many ways as possible. The Stallman sense is about restriction as much as it is about real freedom.

I don't see how enabling people to use a particular product without having to pay for it is in any way endorsing that product. If as part of this agreement Diaspora has to, for example, place a notice on the project website that we are thankful to JetBrains for giving project developers free licences (or, worse, that Diaspora is 'partnering' with JetBrains to develop Diaspora's software), that would be something like endorsement, and that would, I think, need a separate discussion and vote.

RMS doesn't even use diaspora* :P I think we will listen to our own community - and we voted. We can always later vote again to not give licenses - anyone can create proposals at any time.

Diaspora is about freedom in the lower-case (non-Stallman) sense: allowing people to do what they want to do in as many ways as possible. The Stallman sense is about restriction as much as it is about real freedom.

Well put :) This really is going off-topic but the more I hang around with "Stallmanists" the more they appear to me as people who want to restrict freedom, not allow it.

IMHO, in the wiki page we should also recommend other FOSS editors as well, not just RubyMine. Also, we don't even know yet if they will accept our application.

IMHO, in the wiki page we should also recommend other FOSS editors as well, not just RubyMine. Also, we don’t even know yet if they will accept our application.

Of course, the goal of a IDE page is to let newcommer start easily with a well configured IDE !
I'm not particularly a RubyMine fan, just, I think that having a good IDE, beautifull with a strong completion system is a great help for beginners.

My exeprience is, when I started to learn several languages (e.g : OcamL), especially, web-oriented languages, the most difficult thing I met is to find tools to help me to start.

Having a tool with a performant completion system is very important when you start. The thing is, most IDE are too much generalistic. They do a lot of things, but they do it wrong unless you performed long and exhausting configurations...

My opinion here would be the same than @davidthompson : we should not, as a free project, promote non-free software. But if this really helps people to write code for diaspora*, I guess we can give them licences.

Anyway, I miss the vote, and I don't think this is something critical for the project.

I guess the issue is: what counts as promotion?

@mariodanielruizsaa I'm curious to know what exactly you sent to RMS. His response makes it seem as though I have been misquoted: "David Thompson asserted that it would be a “problem” if you “had to” use only freedom-respecting software to develop Diaspora."

He quotes "problem" and "had to" and attributes them to me. I never used those words in my comments here! Why did you misrepresent my position?

I do think that he makes a great point that Diaspora isn't just endorsing nonfree software, but distributing it. This vote has passed, but I do hope that you reconsider your actions and do the right thing.

@davidthompson : be sure that, if JetBrains asks any kind of compensation, I'll be the first to drop Ruby Mine ;)

Well they've not yet replied so maybe they don't want to give out licenses to us ;) Or it's just still sitting in some guys inbox (summer, etc).

Hey so while ago got a reply from JetBrains and they were happy to give the diaspora* project an open source license for RubyMine. This license is for an unlimited amount of users, but we've been requested to follow good judgement on when to give out the license code. In no circumstance should it be made public, this is against the license conditions.

They said initially "core members" but I asked whether we can follow a slightly more relaxed policy and they replied;

We do not have strict guidelines regarding this - I believe each case should be treated personally and mostly according to the common sense. If the person is not a 1-day member and you believe they should be rewarded for their work please be sure to pass the key over.

Anyway, any opinions on how we should limit the license keys. Third merged pull request? We can use that as a little incentive to get contributors, do a blog post etc ;) And of course we should promote FOSS tools too, not just advertise RubyMine, this has been talked already.

The license is valid for a year at a time and includes software upgrades.

I have no opinion on this. Three merged PR seems good. But I think it we be good considering participaton to Loomio to.

Yeah, we just need to agree some rules, or personally at least I'd like that the license would be a reward for those who want it, not "ask and you'll get it". Besides, we can milk a few commits here and there by putting that as a requirement :D

Loomio and generic community participation is important, but it is hard to measure. IMHO the license is probably only really wanted by people who write code anyway?

Maybe two merged pulls would be better - any opinions from others?

at least I’d like that the license would be a reward for those who want it, not “ask and you’ll get it”

I agree with that.

Besides, we can milk a few commits here and there by putting that as a requirement :D

I'm afraid that meet some of the previous objection, i.e : making publicity to a proprietary tool from a community project, no ?

Loomio and generic community participation is important, but it is hard to measure. IMHO the license is probably only really wanted by people who write code anyway?

Don't interessted poeplein contributing usually invest themselves here ? Maybe it's not important. I don't know. Up to the others to decide :D

Besides, we can milk a few commits here and there by putting that as a requirement :D

I’m afraid that meet some of the previous objection, i.e : making publicity to a proprietary tool from a community project, no ?

Sure, if people feel that way we can keep it low key - small mention in the wiki that you can ask for a license when fulfilling certain conditions, like second pull merged or whatever we decide.

Third merged pull request?

Something like this sounds sensible. Or something like a higher number of small PRs or just one major commit to the core code (like sorting out federation or something like that).

However I think a minimum period of contribution/involvement as well, otherwise we might give away a lot of licences to people who make a few commits and disappear forever (which happens all the time, for any number of reasons). It would be good to have some sign that the people we give licences to will stick around to use their copy of RubyMine to create more code for Diaspora in the future.

we might give away a lot of licences to people who make a few commits and disappear forever (which happens all the time, for any number of reasons).

This risk is however a bit limited by the fact that Ruby Mine licenses are on for a year.

Yup, let's not make things too bureaucratic - JetBrains themselves said "use common sense" :)

@goob putting pulls into different categories and trying to constrain licenses to only those who contribute often will just add management overhead - which is what we don't want. We have licenses, we have contributors - I really think we just need a simple rule that we can put in the wiki for example. And then of course all the previous contributors can "cash in" their license if they want - this is probably more important than promoting for new contribs, kind of a thank you for previous contributions.

I think the interest in this is kinda low (amount of votes, amount of comments here) - so we shouldn't spend too much time messing with minor details imho.

Two merged pulls or any other concrete proposals how we should handle giving out the keys? I can make a wiki entry.

Sure, I don't object to that. Was just putting some ideas forwards. It would be good to get more views from core development team members, I'm happy for you guys to decide how to administer this. Well done for getting the free licences, by the way.

Why did I not receive ANY notification for this? :( I can't approve of this personally speaking. It goes against my morals.

But then again, I do believe in the saying, "If you want to make an omelet, you gotta break some eggs."

Eh, I guess I have mixed emotions.

@theatrex This is a "follow stuff that you're interested in and participate if you want" community - we can't inform everyone of everything ;)

If you want to re-raise the issue you are welcome to do so. But to be honest, this whole thing didn't seem to generate much discussion or interest :)

Oh BTW, anyone reading this who has made two successful pull requests to a diaspora* project owned repository (the chat repos must count too imho) - ping me and I'll send you a license key :)

What about the project-site repo? :P

Makes sense to me at least that that should be counted in?

Oh sorry, you said diaspora-owned repo (which includes the project-site one anyway), misread your post, sorry ignore me.

Come on, people... Get free licences of a proprietary software in the name of Diaspora, really ?

Remember you do that on behalf of the Diaspora community. Even if there's a vote here, what does it mean with only 5 voters ?

Is it really the image of the D* project you want to give to the public and potential future developers ?

Everybody is free to use the software they chose, but "rewarding" people with non-free software won't help build a sense of community about D*, and will only scare some dev away, because they will doubt the values of the community.

I won't mention the opinions expressed in this thread about "Stallmanians" (they are out of subject, to say the least), but you're a community and you're making FOSS: you have every rights to expect others to respect your right to use non-free software, but you should at least respect people that think D* shouldn't promote proprietary software in any way.

Or may be you have enough developers and don't need those that don't want to be involved (even indirectly) in non-free software promotion ?

May be I could summarise my point of view that way: everybody is free to use the IDE they like. By promoting one (especially a non-free one), you can only hurt the community, not help build it.

May be I could summarise my point of view that way: everybody is free to use the IDE they like. By promoting one (especially a non-free one), you can only hurt the community, not help build it.

RubyMine is the only IDE of JetBrains that is not usable without license : you can use PyCharm and IntelliJ completely free without asking anyone, even though it's proprietary.

I'm getting really tired of this "Be absolutely FOSS until death" bullshits. FOSS is not a religion. Compagnies producing proprietary software are not all like Microsoft or Google. Until now, JetBrain have been really respectfull with the community. I think you are just being paranoiac...

Remember you do that on behalf of the Diaspora community. Even if there’s a vote here, what does it mean with only 5 voters ?

This subgroup actually has 95 members. Unfortunately this topic just isn't really interesting enough for more than that 5 who voted. We can't require people to vote on proposals.

Understand your point and concern, but in the end diaspora* is a project building FOSS social networking software. We're not a project to generally advocate FOSS outside that - there are advocacy organizations for that. IMHO our project should concentrate on our core task - ie building software and support the diaspora* social network run by that software. Anything else should be (IMHO) considered as non-core functionality.

We're not promoting non-FOSS over FOSS, we're just saying that a company is giving out free licenses for an IDE. IMHO as a project we should be ensuring our community and devs have the best tools to do our core task, whether that is FOSS or not.

If you disagree strongly enough, feel free to spread awareness to the community that a vote regarding posting this status message is ongoing and maybe some more people will get interested :) Anyone can register on Loomio, join this group and vote.

Also, if someone knows a good FOSS editor for Ruby IDE for rails, please speak up :) RubyMine seems like a very popular choice - it's a pity it's not FOSS but that is something we cannot control (IMHO).

I disagree about the statement that the project should be ensuring that devs have the best tools for they task. IMO, it's not its job. And all I said was that D* should remain neutral about FOSS/non-FOSS tools to welcome pro-FOSS and pro-proprietary alike.

I though I was only advocating this neutrality, but now I'm learning that I'm into "FOSS until death" (or am I just being paranoiac).

I disagree about the statement that the project should be ensuring that devs have the best tools for they task. IMO, it’s not its job.

Remember that devs are entierly benevolent. Don't expect them to come and contribute if the project do not try to simplify development...

I though I was only advocating this neutrality

Nope, you're not... We aren't forcing anyone to use anything or promoting any non-FOSS tool. We are just offering people who want it (and sincerely contribute) a great tool to develop.

And all I said was that D* should remain neutral about FOSS/non-FOSS tools to welcome pro-FOSS and pro-proprietary alike.

Neutral would mean not talking about any tools. What if someone would ask what tools are required? No comment? ;)

We're already not neutral, we are specifically promoting Rails and a hundred or so Ruby gems and various other components. We promote several OS's and platforms by mentioning them in our wiki. We promote google mailing lists, IRC, Loomio and web servers.

Suggesting good editors for developers is just another way of helping devs work on diaspora*.

All IMHO :)

The important thing is that the software which Diaspora devs create is FOSS - the software which they use to create that software is (or should be) irrelevant. It's not as if Diaspora's code is going to be infected by capitalism because someone has used a proprietary tool to write some code...

Hm... sweet. Maybe I understand ruby better with a better editor. ;)

I don't think this has to come across as promotion at all. No one will be saying 'Diaspora recommends RubyMine for coding' or 'We prefer that you use RubyMine to write code for Diaspora'. It's simply 'If you want to get a copy of RubyMine, and you code regularly for Diaspora, you can get a copy free'. No promotion there at all, if we're careful about how we word announcements. As long as no announcement says 'We're pleased to make a special offer in partnership with our friends at Jet Brains...' and all that marketing bollocks.

Done.

Thank you, @jasonrobinson !

Hey yo,

The license we received is expiring 2nd September. I wrote to JetBrains to ask for a renew already, and they replied:

According to the rules of the Program, an OS license can be renewed not earlier than a week prior to the expiration date. Our apologies for the early reminders – we work on fixing the issue.

To renew RubyMine OS license to your project, please, contact us at this e-mail in the end of August. Your message will help us proceed with your request asap. Thank you for your understanding and time.

We’ve switched to a per-user license model recently. When applying for a renewal, please, specify how many license keys are needed for the project.

So, end of August is the next time I'll ask again. By that time, we need to actually know who wants to use the license - and maybe add a few keys on top to share to interested devs.

So, who wants a license key for RubyMine? Must have contributed code to diaspora..

I'll post on diaspora too.

So, who wants a license key for RubyMine?

I have one (from diaspora) and I think I will have to ask again for a new key once the current key is expired...

Me too.

Please note that D* is free-libre-open-source software. (#FLOSS) as it is Afero GPL and therefore it should not promote non-free proprietary software. Strongly disagreed.

Who said anything about promotion - they are sponsoring our development by giving free licenses, so people have the choice to use their editor (as well as they can use any opensource-editor anyways). So it's just an offer and anybody contributing to diaspora has the option to use it or not use it. Thats it.

Please note that D* is free-libre-open-source software. (#FLOSS) as it is Afero GPL and therefore it should not promote non-free proprietary software. Strongly disagreed.

Hmmf... Please... Do some researches... RubyMine is based on IntelliJ which is a FOSS under Apache license. RubyMine is only IntelliJ with a setup of a few non-free plugins.

I'm getting really tired of this "please don't use non-GPL software, it's eviiiiiiiiil !" dogma.

I'm not saying it is evil and GPL is all good. I just don't like these community-editions much as they always are half-hearted. They are practically only free-beer software which is not FLOSS. This means in any time the company behind it may go bad (reduced income or even go bankrupted) and then they may start taking money for licenses from the community edition users.

I don't want to say that they are evil, it is only my concern I have about free-beer software ("freeware").

Do you really think that companies (profit-oriented) can give a "complete" software away for free? I look at these "free-to-play" games very seriously. Most of them have "premium items" which you have to pay for (with real money) or play the game for a very long time to get only one of it only to get a small advantage over an other player (PvP) or computer enemy.

There is an other (better) example, the game "Path Of Exile" is free-to-play but you cannot buy premium items (which gives you advantage). The only thing you can buy is cosmetics.

So what does this have to do with an IDE? Well, it has, in a manner of speaking. :) Both companies provide use free-to-use items (such as the community edition of an IDE and a game that doesn't cost anything at the first view to you). Both companies are profit-oriented (again I don't want to brand-mark it as evil, see PoE as a better example). So if the company behind the IDE would always offer a full version with only payed "cosmetics", means no software components that gives you (or a company) advantages over the community edition, I think the concerns about such software would slow start to fade away and maybe more people would be willing to spend some money for nice eye-candy.

Sure a fully FLOSS IDE is much better. :)

I'm sorry to say @rolandhaeder, that your arguments are completely irrelevant.

Even if the compagny got mad, what is the problem? We would just stop using RM. We are not bound to any specific IDE. We just give away free licenses that JetBrains granted us. That's all.

You are not developer, are you? If you are not, then I think you just should not talk about this subject because really you are talking about something you obviously don't know. Either what RubyMine is, nor what IntelliJ is.

My license will expire in 7 days too, so I need a new one.

Mine too. Now RubyMine forces me to press a "continue evaluation" button :p

Gooooood news, license is here! Or was many days ago, I've just been too busy. Damn work has gone ballistic. Anyway, we have 5 license keys. Right now that means me, Faldrian, Augier and SuperTux88 - no one else has asked for one yet. One key remains.

Check your email soon for the key.

Thanks for taking care !