On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 10:53:48AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote: > If non-free becomes more important, we failed. Not really. If it becomes more important for a little while, then less important, then more important again, that's not failure, that's just random fluctuation -- losing a battle doesn't mean losing the war. But even then, *Debian*'s goal has never been to rid the world of non-free software, it's been to make a free operating system. If we find non-free software has become so important we can't do that, then we'll have failed, certainly, but that's a pretty extreme example. Considering we're now disagreeing with other parts of the free software community on what's "free" and what's not, the fact that "non-free" is becoming more important (in particular due to the GFDL) isn't even a failure on behalf of the free software community; it's just a legitimate disagreement. > That would be another > reason for me to get rid of it as soon as possible in order not to > contaminate more people's hard disks. > Anyway, if more programs go into non-free, their use should be > discouraged if people want to use a Free system. They chose on their > own, though. Those two statements seem contradictory to me. If they're choosing on their own, then it's not our responsibility to stop them from "contaminating" their own hard disks. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. Linux.conf.au 2004 -- Because we could. http://conf.linux.org.au/ -- Jan 12-17, 2004
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature