Re: non-DFSG section and CD distributers
Hi,
>>"Leland" == Leland Olds <olds@eskimo.com> writes:
Leland> A more tolerant attitude might guard against Debian being
Leland> perceived as dogmatic in it's idealism.
Webster's encyclopedic unabridged dictionary of the English language:
dog ma: n. pl. -mas, -mata
1 System of principles or tenets, as of a church
2 a specific tenet or doctrine authoratively laid down, as by a
church.
3 prescribed doctrine
4 settled or established opinion, belief, or principle
Methinks the DFSG qualifies ;-). I think I want to follow our
dogma and be idealistic. In this day and age, idealism is more
required than ever, though it does tend to get sneered at.
Why do you feel the need to diffuse our idealism? Are we
trying to be popular? I think our commitment to the free software
paradigm has brought us where we are. Why mend something that works?
Leland> By calling it "non-free" (per DFSG), mixing it with software
Leland> that cannot be legally distributed on CD's without cost, and
Leland> excluding it from the "official" CD, we are discouraging it's
Leland> use.
Yes, of course. The material is still there when needed, but
we do not have to promote it.
Leland> My impression is that a vocal group of Debian developers
Leland> _want_ to discourage the use of non-DFSG software.
Yes. And yes, I guess I am pretty vocal, though I'd like to
believe that I am a representative of the majority of developers.
Leland> I think there is a fear that non-DFSG software may become
Leland> popular, and threaten the existence of "truly free" software.
Believe me, it is not stuff in non free we have to be scared
about then. Guess what is the wrold's most popular OS?
Leland> (I think the sometimes venomous opposition to Qt is a result
Leland> of this fear. Motif seems to be perceived as less of a
Leland> threat, so it is slightly more tolerated, even though it's
Leland> licensing is more restrictive than Qt's.)
Nice theory.
Leland> Personally, I think we could be a little more friendly to
Leland> non-DFSG cost free software, and that it would not threaten
Leland> the goals of the Debian Free Software Guidelines.
I am unfriendly to non-free software not because it threatens
debian. If that were indeed the case, this argument may have
merit. Do you think the DFSG are merely words? Rules that can be
bent? We _believe_ in the principle embodied in the DFSG. These are
not words we seek to have loopholes around.
manoj
who is beginning to face up to the fact that he may well be a fanatic
--
What's the difference between a computer salesman and a used car
salesman? A used car salesman knows when he's lying.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
--
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: