@c For double-sided printing, uncomment:
@c @setchapternewpage odd
@c This date is automagically updated when you save this file:
-@set lastupdate June 5, 2025
+@set lastupdate June 22, 2025
@c %**end of header
@documentencoding UTF-8
Every nontrivial file needs a license notice as well as the copyright
notice. (Without a license notice giving permission to copy and
-change the file, the file is non-free.)
+change the file, the file is nonfree.)
The package itself should contain a full copy of GPL in plain text
(conventionally in a file named @file{COPYING}) and the GNU Free
complex and ugly, if you think that they will increase the burden of
future maintenance, you can and should reject them. This includes
both free or mainly-free platforms such as OpenBSD, FreeBSD, and
-NetBSD, and non-free platforms such as Windows.
+NetBSD, and nonfree platforms such as Windows.
@node Patches Not to Accept
@chapter Patches Not to Accept
@menu
* Non-GNU-only Features:: Every feature in a GNU package should work on GNU.
-* Interoperation with Non-Free:: Don't interoperate better with non-free
+* Interoperation with Nonfree:: Don't interoperate better with nonfree
than with free software.
* Uninstalled Code in Repo:: Putting code in the package repo without
installing it.
the GNU system equally well in the new feature. If there is no hope
of that, just ``No thanks'' is enough.
-@node Interoperation with Non-Free
-@section Interoperation with Non-Free Applications
+@node Interoperation with Nonfree
+@section Interoperation with Nonfree Applications
It is quite usual to implement features in GNU programs to make them
-work conveniently with widely used non-free tools and applications.
+work conveniently with widely used nonfree tools and applications.
But there are situations where you should not implement cooperation
-with a non-free program, which we can refer to here as ShackleMe.
+with a nonfree program, which we can refer to here as ShackleMe.
@itemize @bullet
@item
If ShackleMe is not well-known, reject the idea. GNU packages should
-not even @emph{mention} an obscure non-free program
+not even @emph{mention} an obscure nonfree program
(@pxref{References,,, standards, GNU Coding Standards}).
@item
@item
You never have an obligation to write, install or maintain any sort of
-support for a non-free program. If it is unmaintained and breaks, and
+support for a nonfree program. If it is unmaintained and breaks, and
nobody else wants to maintain it you can delete it. Don't feel
trapped into working on it!
@end itemize
version, and checking that the result exactly matches the new version.
@node Binary Distribution
-@section Binary Distribution for Non-Free Platforms
+@section Binary Distribution for Nonfree Platforms
Some package maintainers release pre-compiled binaries for proprietary
systems such as Microsoft Windows or MacOS@. It's entirely up to you
this.
If you distribute them, please inform their users prominently that
-those non-free platforms trample their freedom. It is useful to refer
+those nonfree platforms trample their freedom. It is useful to refer
them to
@url{https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-even-more-important.html}.
You can say, ``This program respects your freedom, but Windows does
the site runs on free software alone. (It is ok if the site uses
unreleased custom software, since that is free in a trivial sense:
there's only one user and it has the four freedoms.) If the web site
-for a GNU package runs on non-free software, the public will see this,
-and it will have the effect of granting legitimacy to the non-free
+for a GNU package runs on nonfree software, the public will see this,
+and it will have the effect of granting legitimacy to the nonfree
program.
If you use multiple sites, they should all follow that criterion.
no licensing consortium has been set up. GNU programs and their web
sites should not distribute video in MPEG-2 or MPEG 4 formats.
-A GNU package should not recommend use of any non-free program, nor
-should it require a non-free program (such as a non-free compiler or
+A GNU package should not recommend use of any nonfree program, nor
+should it require a nonfree program (such as a nonfree compiler or
IDE) to build. Thus, a GNU package cannot be written in a programming
language that does not have a free software implementation. Now that
GNU/Linux systems are widely available, all GNU packages should
provide full functionality on a 100% free GNU/Linux system, and should
-not require any non-free software to build or function.
+not require any nonfree software to build or function.
The GNU Coding Standards say a lot more about this issue.
-Similarly, a GNU package should not require the use of non-free
+Similarly, a GNU package should not require the use of nonfree
software, including JavaScript, for the coordination of its
development. For example, please don't use Transifex for translation
-of your software because it requires your translators to use non-free,
+of your software because it requires your translators to use nonfree,
JavaScript-based editing tools. Instead, a service without any
ethical concerns should be used, such as The Translation Project
(@url{https://translationproject.org}).
-A GNU package should not refer the user to any non-free documentation
+A GNU package should not refer the user to any nonfree documentation
for free software. The need for free documentation to come with free
software is now a major focus of the GNU project; to show that we are
serious about the need for free documentation, we must not contradict
our position by recommending use of documentation that isn't free.
Please don't host discussions about your package in a service that
-requires non-free software. For instance, Google+ ``communities''
-require running a non-free JavaScript program to post a message, so
+requires nonfree software. For instance, Google+ ``communities''
+require running a nonfree JavaScript program to post a message, so
they can't be used in the Free World. Google Groups has the same
problem. To host discussions there would be excluding people who live
by free software principles.
for informing the public about the GNU system and the ideas of the
free software movement. Please avoid saying ``open source'' and avoid
calling the GNU system ``Linux'', just as you would in the package
-itself (@pxref{Terminology}). Likewise, avoid promoting non-free
+itself (@pxref{Terminology}). Likewise, avoid promoting nonfree
programs (@pxref{References,,, standards, GNU Coding
Standards}) as you would in the package itself.
We don't recommend any specific payment service. However, GNU
developers should not use a service that requires them to sign a
proprietary software license, such as Google's payment service.
-Please also avoid sites that requires users to run non-free software in
+Please also avoid sites that requires users to run nonfree software in
order to donate. (This includes JavaScript software, so try it with
LibreJS or with JavaScript disabled.)
@quotation
You've asked us to install support for doing XYZ on ShackleOS. We can't
do that until we have support for XYZ on the GNU system. GNU Project
-policy is not to add special support for a non-free operating system
+policy is not to add special support for a nonfree operating system
until we have equivalent support for the GNU system.
-A non-free system subjugates users. You may not notice this if you
+A nonfree system subjugates users. You may not notice this if you
have become accustomed to such subjugation, but we do. The Free Software
-Movement aims to liberate those users by replacing non-free systems
+Movement aims to liberate those users by replacing nonfree systems
with free software such as the GNU system.
This program does not aim to replace ShackleOS, but the GNU system does.
@quotation
You've asked us to install a feature specifically to work with
-ShackleMe, but that program is non-free. GNU Project policy is not to
-add special support for interoperation with a non-free program until we
+ShackleMe, but that program is nonfree. GNU Project policy is not to
+add special support for interoperation with a nonfree program until we
support interoperation with comparable free programs equally well or
better.
-A non-free program subjugates users. You may not notice this if you
+A nonfree program subjugates users. You may not notice this if you
have become accustomed to such subjugation, but we do. The mission of
-the GNU Project is to liberate those users by replacing the non-free
+the GNU Project is to liberate those users by replacing the nonfree
programs with free programs.
This program does not aim to replace ShackleMe, but other free
@setfilename standards.info
@settitle GNU Coding Standards
@c This date is automagically updated when you save this file:
-@set lastupdate November 13, 2024
+@set lastupdate June 22, 2025
@c %**end of header
@dircategory GNU organization
* Writing C:: Making the best use of C.
* Documentation:: Documenting programs.
* Managing Releases:: The release process.
-* References:: Mentioning non-free software or documentation.
+* References:: Mentioning nonfree software or documentation.
* GNU Free Documentation License:: Copying and sharing this manual.
* Index::
avoids legal difficulties, and other related issues.
@menu
-* Reading Non-Free Code:: Referring to proprietary programs.
+* Reading Nonfree Code:: Referring to proprietary programs.
* Contributions:: Accepting contributions.
* Trademarks:: How we deal with trademark issues.
+* Terms to Avoid:: Be careful of certain words!
@end menu
-@node Reading Non-Free Code
+@node Reading Nonfree Code
@section Referring to Proprietary Programs
@cindex proprietary programs
@cindex avoiding proprietary code
GNU packages. Please write ``Windows'' in full, or abbreviate it to
``w.'' @xref{System Portability}.
+@node Terms to Avoid
+@chapter Terms to Avoid
+
+Be careful---never use the word ``steward'' to refer to any person
+involved with developing any free software! An EU directive, the CRA,
+gives that word a specific legal meaning which imposes requirements
+that are painful or even impossible.
+
@node Design Advice
@chapter General Program Design
@cindex program design
@node Reading other Manuals
@section Reading other Manuals
-There may be non-free books or documentation files that describe the
+There may be nonfree books or documentation files that describe the
program you are documenting.
It is ok to use these documents for reference, just as the author of a
of any non-fiction book consists of facts, in this case facts about how
a certain program works, and these facts are necessarily the same for
everyone who writes about the subject. But be careful not to copy your
-outline structure, wording, tables or examples from preexisting non-free
+outline structure, wording, tables or examples from preexisting nonfree
documentation. Copying from free documentation may be ok; please check
with the FSF about the individual case.
other files to get.
@node References
-@chapter References to Non-Free Software and Documentation
-@cindex references to non-free material
+@chapter References to Nonfree Software and Documentation
+@cindex references to nonfree material
A GNU program should not recommend, promote, or grant legitimacy to
-the use of any non-free program. Proprietary software is a social and
+the use of any nonfree program. Proprietary software is a social and
ethical problem, and our aim is to put an end to that problem. We
can't stop some people from writing proprietary programs, or stop
other people from using them, but we can and should refuse to
@url{https://www.gnu.org/@/philosophy/@/free-sw.html}, and the definition
of free documentation is found at
@url{https://www.gnu.org/@/philosophy/@/free-doc.html}. The terms ``free''
-and ``non-free'', used in this document, refer to those definitions.
+and ``nonfree'', used in this document, refer to those definitions.
A list of important licenses and whether they qualify as free is in
@url{https://www.gnu.org/@/licenses/@/license-list.html}. If it is not
by writing to @email{licensing@@gnu.org}. We will answer, and if the
license is an important one, we will add it to the list.
-When a non-free program or system is well known, you can mention it in
+When a nonfree program or system is well known, you can mention it in
passing---that is harmless, since users who might want to use it
probably already know about it. For instance, it is fine to explain
-how to build your package on top of some widely used non-free
+how to build your package on top of some widely used nonfree
operating system, or how to use it together with some widely used
-non-free program, after first explaining how to use it on the GNU
+nonfree program, after first explaining how to use it on the GNU
system.
However, you should give only the necessary information to help those
-who already use the non-free program to use your program with
+who already use the nonfree program to use your program with
it---don't give, or refer to, any further information about the
proprietary program, and don't imply that the proprietary program
enhances your program, or that its existence is in any way a good
program will not see anything likely to lead them to take an interest
in it.
-You shouldn't recommend any non-free add-ons for the non-free program,
+You shouldn't recommend any nonfree add-ons for the nonfree program,
but it is ok to mention free add-ons that help it to work with your
program, and how to install the free add-ons even if that requires
-running some non-free program.
+running some nonfree program.
-If a non-free program or system is obscure in your program's domain,
+If a nonfree program or system is obscure in your program's domain,
your program should not mention or support it at all, since doing so
-would tend to popularize the non-free program more than it popularizes
+would tend to popularize the nonfree program more than it popularizes
your program. (You cannot hope to find many additional users for your
program among the users of Foobar, if the existence of Foobar is not
generally known among people who might want to use your program.)
Sometimes a program is free software in itself but depends on a
-non-free platform in order to run. For instance, it used to be the
-case that many Java programs depended on some non-free Java libraries.
+nonfree platform in order to run. For instance, it used to be the
+case that many Java programs depended on some nonfree Java libraries.
(See @uref{https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html}.)
To recommend or promote such a program is to promote the other
programs it needs; therefore, judge mentions of the former as if they
were mentions of the latter. For this reason, we were careful about
listing Java programs in the Free Software Directory: we wanted to
-avoid promoting the non-free Java libraries.
+avoid promoting the nonfree Java libraries.
Java no longer has this problem, but the general principle will remain
the same: don't recommend, promote or legitimize programs that depend
-on non-free software to run.
+on nonfree software to run.
-Some free programs strongly encourage the use of non-free software. A
+Some free programs strongly encourage the use of nonfree software. A
typical example is @command{mplayer}. It is free software in itself,
and the free code can handle some kinds of files. However,
-@command{mplayer} recommends use of non-free codecs for other kinds of
+@command{mplayer} recommends use of nonfree codecs for other kinds of
files, and users that install @command{mplayer} are very likely to
install those codecs along with it. To recommend @command{mplayer}
-is, in effect, to promote use of the non-free codecs.
+is, in effect, to promote use of the nonfree codecs.
Thus, you should not recommend programs that strongly encourage the
-use of non-free software. This is why we do not list
+use of nonfree software. This is why we do not list
@command{mplayer} in the Free Software Directory.
-A GNU package should not refer the user to any non-free documentation
+A GNU package should not refer the user to any nonfree documentation
for free software. Free documentation that can be included in free
operating systems is essential for completing the GNU system, or any
free operating system, so encouraging it is a priority; to recommend
use of documentation that we are not allowed to include undermines the
impetus for the community to produce documentation that we can
-include. So GNU packages should never recommend non-free
+include. So GNU packages should never recommend nonfree
documentation.
By contrast, it is ok to refer to journal articles and textbooks in
the comments of a program for explanation of how it functions, even
-though they are non-free. This is because we don't include such
+though they are nonfree. This is because we don't include such
things in the GNU system even if they are free---they are outside the
scope of what a software distribution needs to include.
-Referring to a web site that describes or recommends a non-free
+Referring to a web site that describes or recommends a nonfree
program is promoting that program, so please do not make links to (or
mention by name) web sites that contain such material. This policy is
relevant particularly for the web pages for a GNU package.
What about chains of links? Following links from nearly any web site
-can lead eventually to promotion of non-free software; this is
+can lead eventually to promotion of nonfree software; this is
inherent in the nature of the web. Here's how we treat that.
You should not refer to AT&T's web site if that recommends AT&T's
-non-free software packages; you should not refer to a page @var{p}
+nonfree software packages; you should not refer to a page @var{p}
that links to AT&T's site presenting it as a place to get some
-non-free program, because that part of the page @var{p} itself
-recommends and legitimizes the non-free program.
+nonfree program, because that part of the page @var{p} itself
+recommends and legitimizes the nonfree program.
However, if @var{p} contains a link to AT&T's web site for some other
purpose (such as long-distance telephone service), that is no reason
A web page recommends a program in an implicit but particularly strong
way if it requires users to run that program in order to use the page.
Many pages contain JavaScript code which they recommend in this way.
-This JavaScript code may be free or non-free, but non-free is the usual
+This JavaScript code may be free or nonfree, but nonfree is the usual
case.
If the purpose for which you would refer to the page cannot be carried
-out without running non-free JavaScript code, then you should not refer
+out without running nonfree JavaScript code, then you should not refer
to it. Thus, if the purpose of referring to the page is for people to
view a video, or subscribing to a mailing list, and the viewing or
-subscribing fail to work if the user's browser blocks the non-free
+subscribing fail to work if the user's browser blocks the nonfree
JavaScript code, then don't refer to that page.
-The extreme case is that of web sites which depend on non-free
+The extreme case is that of web sites which depend on nonfree
JavaScript code even to @emph{see} the contents of the pages. Any
site hosted on @indicateurl{wix.com} has this problem, and so do some
other sites. Referring people to such pages to read their contents
-is, in effect, urging them to run those non-free programs---so please
+is, in effect, urging them to run those nonfree programs---so please
don't refer to those pages. (Such pages also break the Web, so they
deserve condemnation for two reasons.)
projects / thirdparty / gnulib.git / commitdiff
