On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 02:24:48PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> I do not believe Debian should be distributing such software. It
> rightly fails the DFSG. For some users (for instance, a business) it is
> actually less free than something without source (such as Netscape 4.7).
> The no discrimination clause in DFSG is an important one. Debian must
> be equally Free for all.
Why must it? We have an area that's free for all: it's called main. We
have another area that contains stuff that's not free for all, but that
is useful and that we're allowed to distribute. If you don't like the
non-free stuff, then don't use it and don't maintain it.
Why do you find that solution so unacceptable that you think Debian *must*
do something else?
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 can.
http://conf.linux.org.au/ -- Jan 12-17, 2004
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature