The free software community faces a complex challenge as developers increasingly rely on proprietary development tools and services, despite advocating for software freedom. This trend raises concerns about compromising core principles and developer independence.
A notable example emerged in 2002 when Linux kernel developers adopted BitKeeper, a proprietary version control system. While it offered advanced distributed development capabilities unavailable in free tools at the time, this decision proved problematic. In 2005, BitKeeper's owner revoked several developers' licenses after attempts to create a free alternative, forcing the creation of Git as a replacement.
This scenario reflects a broader pattern involving development platforms like SourceForge, Google Code, and GitHub. While these services host free software projects, their own codebases remain proprietary and inaccessible to users. Though offered without charge and marketed as supporters of free software, these platforms don't extend the same freedoms to their own tools.
The situation creates an ethical contradiction - developers advocate for software freedom while relying on tools that restrict it. This undermines the movement's credibility and sends a conflicting message to users about the importance of software freedom.
More concerning is how proprietary tools affect long-term software freedom. When free software depends on nonfree tools for development and distribution, it creates vulnerability. Users and developers become dependent on proprietary platforms they cannot modify or control.
Free alternatives exist, such as Savane for project hosting and Gitorious for code collaboration. The free software community would benefit from supporting and improving these tools rather than accepting proprietary options for short-term convenience.
The path forward requires maintaining principle over expedience. Just as GNU initially focused on creating free development tools, today's free software community must prioritize using and advancing free development platforms. This approach better serves the movement's technical needs and ethical foundations while building toward a truly free software ecosystem.