Defining Free Software Business
mjr at phonecoop.coop
Tue Jun 27 23:37:46 UTC 2006
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <ams at gnu.org>
> It is the case, Debian gives space, distributes non-free software, and
> explicitly supports non-free software. Just because you and MJ like
> to insist that "It isn't the case" doesn't make it any less true.
The debian /project/ does those things. I don't like it,
but I've never denied it. The debian OS shouldn't do any
of those things.
> If Debian was so pure and wonderful, then it would be listed as a 100%
> free software system and recommended by the GNU project. But it
> isn't, since Debian includes non-free software.
Debian doesn't include non-free software. I'm not sure why
it isn't recommended by the GNU project. I think it's most
likely some erroneous beliefs of some @gnu.org and now that
we won't include all FSF's adware manuals without question.
We are bazaar and maybe cathedral-builders dislike that.
> No, I mean Debian the project as a whole, every part of the project.
> Including Debian GNU/Linux, Debian GNU/Hurd, Debian GNU/k*BSD, etc etc
Debian is not the project, it's the operating system.
All of Debian GNU/Linux, Debian GNU/Hurd, Debian GNU/k*BSD
should be 100% free software or it's a serious bug that
will be dealt with accordingly.
> etc. Once again you go after a straw man, it is getting quite boring
I don't think only one side should get to duff up scarecrows.
Laux nur mia opinio: vidu http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Bv sekvu http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
More information about the Discussion