Re: General Resolution: Handling of the non-free section: proposedBallot
Raul Miller <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > There is no text of the social contract which applies the word Debian
> > to non-free under any description at all, but rather, serves to
> > mention both only to make as clear as possible that non-free is not
> > part of Debian, using those very words.
> I guess that's true if you don't think that we are Debian.
> If we are Debian, then the use of terms such as "we" or "our" used when
> describing our relationship to non-free fit that description.
No, look at what "we" do.
"We" have created a non-free FTP area.
"We" support its use (that is, we make sure Debian works with it)
"We" provide infrastructure
It does not say that "we provide non-free packages". Rather, we
provide an area, so that people can provide non-free packages if they
want to, but what they are doing is not Debian. And where it does
this, it says "although non-free software isn't a part of Debian".
Not just "the Debian system" or "the Debian distribution", but
We currently have a non-Debian thing living in close relationship with
Debian, and many people have become so confused by those close ties
that they have decided that the non-Debian thing is really part of
Debian after all.
As section one says, "we will never make the system depend on an item
of non-free software". If a piece of non-free software is really
essential, then we have failed in that goal.