Re: Is vrms really still a Virtual Richard M. Stallman?

[Tom <tb.31112.nospam@comcast.net>]

On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 02:14:53PM +1100, Andrew Lau wrote:
> Hey everyone,
> 
> I don't know whether to file a bug report or just laugh my head off.
> 
> netsnipe@espresso:~% vrms
>               Non-free packages installed on espresso
>                                                                                 
> doc-linux-nonfree-text    Linux HOWTOs in ASCII format (non-free)
> doc-rfc-std               Standard RFCs
> 
> Now we all know Richard M. Stallman's position on the GFDL, but I find
> it extremely ironic that his virtual persona in Debian now discriminates
> against his packages which uses a license his real self would approve. 
> 
> So is vrms now up for a name change before the real RMS decides to sue
> us for misrepresenting him! = ) 
> 
> vbranden?
> vdlegal?
> 
> Nominations are now open.

I was kind of happy when I saw the Ian or somebody (the original guy) 
suggest spinning off non-free.

Nothing better than redfining a problem not to exist.