Bug#681419: Alternative dependencies on non-free packages in main: counterargument
> In particular, I think Steve's example is one where we should
> certainly not compromise our principles just because some proprietary
> software distributors are being uncooperative. Our political
> opponents, with whom we are making a practical compromise, are giving
> those of us who want to make that compromise a choice between
> (a) advertising their program or (b) doing some extra work.
> It is a longstanding tradition in Debian that those who want to work
> on non-free should bear the costs of complying with our principles.
> I don't think the minor cost here is worth this compromise - even
> [though] some would say that the damage to our principles is also
> fairly minor.
I want to add just one thing to this:
Does it matter to us that some of our allies have a very strong
opinion about this ?
While we disagree vigorously with the GNU Project about some important
things, our goals are similar. The GNU Project have also been doing
this kind of thing for longer than us. I think at the very least we
should treat their views with respect.
And from a practical point of view, I would prefer to make a choice
that significantly eases collaboration with the GNU Project to one
that slightly eases collaboration with proprietary software vendors.