Re: The "Free" vs. "Non-Free" issue
> > On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 05:00:44PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > > Of course, the problem is that there are always more non-free packages
> > > to be uploaded. When first I proposed the elimination of non-free,
> > > there was much whining about Netscape. Now I hear much whining about
> > > Japanese PDFs.
On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 06:13:58PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> > This is bad, why?
On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 06:19:51PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> I think it has something to do with fonts being non-free.
Thank you.
If that is the reason why this is bad, then your statement "there are
always more non-free packages to be uploaded" isn't something that's
a flaw in our choice to distribute them. Instead, it's a criticism
of people licensing those packages in a fashion which don't meet our
guidelines.
Also, you seem to have overlooked one of my questions:
> > > Perhaps a logical place to start is, effective immediately, completely
> > > and totally ban the introduction of any new package into non-free.
> >
> > And your basis for this is the document of which the DFSG is part of?
--
Raul
Reply to: