Re: non-DFSG section and CD distributers
Hi,
> > Another expression of the same:
> > - We do not tolerate other views, approaches, or principles
>
> Rubbish. I tolerate DEC just fine. I see nothing wrong with
> people writing proprietary software. I just want Debian to be
> free.
Free of what? :)
> >- We are always right and we must be right and others
> > must do things the way we have "demonstrated" it.
>
> Others can do as they damn well please. We, however, shall do
> as the DFSG states we shall act. Have you ever seen us tell
> miscrosoft how to act?
No, but I've seen Bruce telling Intel how to act and in which form to
present us with bugfix.
> > - If you do not play by our rules then we dont play
>
> Right. This is called ethics.
Or rudeness.
> >- We are unable to cooperate with others since we will
> > reject all compromise.
>
> Yes, we refuse to compromise our values just to play lackey to
> other interests. We always co-operate with free software developers.
And WE will decide who's writing free software.
> > - We will insist on our words and the meaning we give them.
> > We have are the right (tm) software worldview.
>
> Yes, we are unequivocal, and we mean what we say. We even
> define the terms we use so there is no room for misunderstanding or
> newspeak.
Yeah-yeah. With Social Contract full of statements which potentialy can
be treated any way you like. For pointing to them I was awarded a title of
"Talmudic Interpreter" by out project leader.
> >- We do not bother with inferior low lifes who have
> > not seen the (GPL) life yet and are refusing to understand
> > that we mean GPL when we say free.
>
> You are the one making the value judgement. Is internet
> explorer free? People say that it is, since there is no up-front cost
> to it. Is Nestscape almost free, since it only costs $50? We define
> what we mean when we talk about free software. What's so hard to
> understand?
Exactly, but even WE agree on different levels of freeness:
we have non-us, non-free (which is still free in some sense - can be
distributed on our ftp site, etc.). Why not be clear on what we mean
each time?
> >- We believe one day all the world will only use GPL software...
>
> Hope. Not believe, Hope. Imagine ...
This would be a nightmare we had in Russia with everything and everybody
"free" ... Brrr...
> > In short: You better have nothing to do with us.
>
> ..if you are a nasty non-free software write ;-). Stronder
> than I'd put it, but we need *someone* to prmote the concept of free
> software. We are it, I guess.
Free for the sake of free? Or free for the sake of someting else?
I stand for the second one.
> > Excellent PR.
>
> I agree.
I don't.
Thanks.
Alex Y.
--
_
_( )_
( (o___ +-------------------------------------------+
| _ 7 | Alexander Yukhimets |
\ (") | http://pages.nyu.edu/~aqy6633/ |
/ \ \ +-------------------------------------------+
--
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: