On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 11:56:59PM +0000, Andrew M. A. Cater wrote: > [Semi-serious interim solution] > > Rename main to DFSG-free (or Debian-free, for short). Move contrib > and non-free together into a new section (non-DFSG-free or non-Debian > for short). How would that help rectify the implication that non-free is "part of" Debian? http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/non-free/ > As an organisation, we need to stress the Social Contract and the DFSG > as factors which help keep us honest. As DD's, we choose to submit > ourselves to the Social Contract and to show that we care about Free > Software: in this, we are no better or worse than other humans but > we voluntarily choose to impose restrictions on our work in an > effort to build a better distribution for "our users". > [The closest analogy I can find is religious: monks/nuns and brothers > would all admit they are ordinary men and women - they choose > voluntarily to submit themselves to a higher standard of conduct and > stricter rules than they would expect of others, but doing that doesn't > make them intrinsically "better people". The other analogy is of > the Castalian society in the Glass Bead Game by Hesse] While I'm nervous about what people will do with a religious analogy, I do myself in approximate agreement with the thesis that we, Debian Developers, hold ourselves to standards of conduct that aren't terribly relevant to profit-centered, commercial distributors of software. > Non-free software is not intrinsically evil of itself, nor are those > who use it or develop for it: I have not seen anyone in this discussion make such an assertion. > I can contend that Free Software is always preferable but I shouldn't > force it on others against their will but rather lead by example, > IMHO. And that's exactly what John's GR is trying to get us to do better: lead by example. Right now our example is: http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/non-free/ How does one deduce from that URL that "non-free" is not "part of Debian"? You can get it from debian.org out of a directory called Debian; that implies inclusion to my eye! It is only my large amount of contextual knowledge, including my familiar with the Social Contract, that corrects this impression. > This argument could go on and on for a long time :( Please, > moderation in tone will serve the Debian image well as will a > coherently argued rationale - rather than flaming the living shit > out of each other :) I believe that the proponents of the GR have demonstrated moderation. So too have the majority of the GR's detractors. -- G. Branden Robinson | I have a truly elegant proof of the Debian GNU/Linux | above, but it is too long to fit branden@debian.org | into this .signature file. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
pgpJsq3WvGa0t.pgp
Description: PGP signature