On Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 10:02:46AM -0400, Buddha Buck wrote:
> At 11:34 AM 10/2/00 +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> >Well, because you have no use for most of the stuff in non-free, it don't mean
> >that other people have not need of it.
> >
> >Even if the people needing it are just a few one.
> >
> >That said, maybe we could make a survey or something such, to see what
> >packages are in non-free, Who uses them, and if it would be possible to use a
> >free replacement.
>
> I would say, without such a survey taking place, that for each package in
> non-free, there is at least one person who:
>
> * has stated agreement with the DSC and DFSG
> * uses the package, or at least believes others do
> * feels strongly about the package enough to package and maintain it
>
> Shouldn't those be good reasons to keep the package?
>
> Just because there is a "free replacement" doesn't mean that we should drop
> the non-free version. Yes, there are free replacements for Navigator,
> including Mozilla among others. But as a user, I'm familiar with
> Navigator, comfortable with it. None of the others have quite the same
> feel and ease of use for me. So I use Navigator[1] -- and I'm not
> alone. True, I'd not lose Navigator if non-free disappeared, but I'd lose
> the BTS, I'd lose the painless install/updates, I'd potentially lose the
> integration, etc.
>
> If I am forced to switch to a free replacement because of a policy
> decision, especially if it is against the wishes of the developer who is
> packaging Navigator, then that's political blackmail.
>
> It would be different if the developer involved decided that maintaining it
> was no longer worth his time -- that happens with lots of packages, and if
> people really want it, another developer could pick up the ball. It isn't
> Debian trying to make a political statement by hurting its users.
>
> I'm interested in knowing how non-free and contrib compares (sizewise, or
> number of packages) with main, and over time (is non-free/contrib 10% of
> Debian? 5%? How fast is this growing/shrinking? Is non-free/contrib
> growing or shrinking in absolute size?)
>
> Later,
> Buddha
>
> [1] The real reason I use Navigator is for secure sites, sites with
> Java/Javascript, etc. If Mozilla allowed me to do my online banking, play
> the daily crossword puzzle at www.dictionary.com, and a few other similar
> things, I'd go for it.
>
Quite true!
Taking away the non-free packages would just complicate my life. I have the
non-free Gimp package installed - not because I want to use GIF, but because
so many other things support it.
It has been said that "people are lazy". I know I am. I just want an easy
life. Having a ``free'' OS on which I can add one or two non-free packages
makes my life a awful lot simpler. As a developer I can pull FTP source and
build it - but it take so much time to do that. To a user who is not a
developer that is a task many just aren't prepared for. Lots will just find
and easier OS to use (may be Red Hat, maybe Windows - I'm sure M$ would love
that).
Look at the dominance that M$ has one the s/w market. At work the managers use
M$ s/w not because they think it is the best (you should hear the complaints
at times) but because every one else (customers and suppliers) use it. Project
plans and documents are easily interchanged.
IMHO turning Debian into a pure free OS wouldn't help the free software cause.
Until you dominate the market place, one must offer alternatives to the market
leader. Wasn't that one of the reasons Sun bought StarOffice and then gave it
away at no cost?
Look at the ultimate purest, Microsoft, they beat IBM, they swallow up or
destroy any one who has slice of the market that they want. They become so big
that the US government takes action. And now there biggest competitor in the
market is a group of up-starts that give their s/w away for free (as in beer)!
How does one compete with that?
I belive that Debian at the momment has the best compremise between supporting
Free Software and needs of the users.
Steve
--
Steve Dobson steve.dobson@krasnegar.demon.co.uk
Attachment:
pgpl1RB5EjiAX.pgp
Description: PGP signature