@moshimotsu Thank you for the valid remark and for raising this important topic.

I have a lot of respect for the part of the Linux and free software community that deliberately limits itself to using only FOSS tools in every aspect of their work. People like Richard Stallman embody that philosophy with a level of consistency and integrity I truly admire. That part of the community is vital: it defines the moral north star, keeps us honest, and ensures software freedom doesn’t quietly erode over time.

At the same time, I want to be honest that this project would not exist without some tools that are currently proprietary, even though the entire production pipeline runs on Linux. That’s not something I’m trying to hide or hand-wave away.

For me, the GPL (and free software in general) has always had two meanings.

One is the ethical stance: software freedom as a principle that should be upheld everywhere, without compromise.

The other is practical: the GPL as a framework that allows people with different motivations, constraints, and economic realities to work together and move technology forward collectively.

I don’t believe one of these views is “right” and the other “wrong”. I believe both are essential (only the license is ‘right’… nah, it’s copyleft 😉

Ensuring we don’t lose sight of why Linux exists is crucial. But pragmatic contributors also help Linux spread and evolve. I find myself somewhere in between: ethics first unless there's only an opportunistic option. Maybe you still remember the time when bitbucket was the kernel source management software? Luckily it led to Linus making git...

In the end, whether someone contributes code, documentation, infrastructure, art, music, or adoption - using only FOSS tools or not - they’re still pushing the world in a direction where Linux, OpenSource, and collaboration matter.

That shared direction is what this project tries to celebrate. Unity through the license. Which might even inspire another song on the next album 😉