Topic: what makes free software free
The last post of 2024 made me think about how difficult is to talk about ethics in the world of software.
Fortunately, we already understand that available source code is necessary but not sufficient. For that, one should be able to play/learn/change/publish.... the code. But also the code should be readable. For example, at the beginning javascript was intended as naturally free. It has to reach our browsers in plain text format. Nowadays, javascript reach our browsers in waves , out of control, massively, thousands of characters written in a single line. I do not know any legal restriction on taking/coping/modifying that shots of code, but even experienced programmers will need hours to understand a single web page (I am talking about the text-format javascript of e.g. a social-net webpage).
Then, the example of systemd, the software is officially free, is part of some Libre distributions. But the feeling is that it is not fully free: i) it restricts the OS (only Linux) ii) restrict the environment (no musl lib) iii) it is huge, hardly modular, even experience programmers would need hours to make a single proper modification.
So what is the technical definition of a software made with ethics in mind. I would say it is quiet difficult. I have to remember why the GNU project selected UNIX as the model of choice: UNIX was comprehensive even by a small group of developers. There was not huge pieces of software, just UNIX philosophy. Even if UNIX would not be the best technical choice, it was the most accessible. I can imagine replacing cp, mv, ls or cd one by one on a commercial UNIX and slowly building GNU testing on all single step should be comprehensive.
So, user oriented libre software should have a proper license, but also should be simple, modular and readable - comprehensive. Unfortunately, this is not easy to write down into a license.