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

Re: Non-free, Contrib and CDs (Was Re: GNU Win32? Not anymore.)

On Wed, 16 Jul 1997, Bruce Perens wrote:

> From: Alex Yukhimets <aqy6633@acf5.nyu.edu>
> > "Social contract" is an example of using "non-free" term in two
> > _different_ meanings interchangeably. (As _all_ the software that does not
> > conform with "free software guidelines", and as a _subset_ of this
> > software, still suitable to be placed under non-free directory).
> Oh. I see what you are getting at. The "non-free" directory is the
> directory of software that doesn't meet the free software guidelines
> but we still have the right to put it on our FTP site. This is a subset
> of the broader category of non-free software. We don't have the right to
> put Applixware's SDK in the "non-free" directory on our FTP site, although
> it is non-free by our guidelines. Socrates is a man, but not all men are
> Socrates :-)
> I'm really loath to reopen the discussion on the guidelines at this
> time, and I don't think this issue merits it.
> The above could merit a note in the developer's documentation for the
> Talmudic Interpreters among us. I don't see that it merits more than that.

O.K :-), but in my view, the "guidlines" were about "free" software, not
non-free software.  Therefore, they don't really control or have anything
to do with how we organize the non-free stuff.  All the guidlines do, is
say, "certain software can't be in the main debian distribution."  they
don't say what we do with them afterwards.


TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: