[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Preparing linux-2.6 2.6.18-1



On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 11:16:02 +0200 Frederik Schueler wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 02:53:21PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > I honestly believe that moving linux-2.6 to non-free hurts our users
> > more than stripping non-free parts of the Debian-precompiled kernel.
>  
> of course.
> 
> > Also, section 4 of the SC talks equally about users and free
> > software, not users above free software. 
> 
> And free software above the needs of our users neither. 
> 
> And exactly this is what it is all about: find a way to satisfy BOTH 
> priorities, not just one.

No. It is about the definition of "our users".

If "our users" are dependent on non-free software, then we indirectly
say in our social contract that free and non-free software is of equal
concern to us.

(I deliberately take the example of "non-free software" instead of of
"firmware", to simplify my argument)


I claim that "our users" does not include users of non-free software.

I would even say that such users are free-riders of free software, if
their use is dependent on our system which is "100% free software".



> working together with upstream and the vendors to fix the issue is
> what we should do,

I agree. That is exactly what we should do. Just as we should work
together with the GNU people to "fix" what we consider problems with
their free documentation license.

But until those issues are solved, we need to rip out any and all parts
of our system that we become aware of is in violation with our own
rules.



> not ripping the blobs aout of the kernel and forgetting about their
> existence. 

I see no contradiction between working with upstream and ripping out
bobs (until hopefully upstream is convinced in each case).

I think none wants to forget.



> Guess which Distribution users who "made a poor buying choice" will
> not use again.

Whatever you're hinting at, it sounds like "their users", not ours.

If we lose users due to removing questionable stuff from our
distribution, then those users were, in my opinion, never really
"ours". They really truly wanted a different kind of system, and just
ended up with ours due to misunderstanding or accident or whatever.



 - Jonas


-- 
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 - Enden er nær: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm

Attachment: pgpCm0dqIPRX8.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: