Re: agreeing with the DFSG (was Re: non-free --> non-dfsg)
Hi Anthony,
> But you should agree with our social contract, right? That is, after all,
> what the point of a social contract /is/, isn't it? That we'll all abide
> by it?
Agreeing and abiding aren't the same thing. A developer may not agree
with the social contract but s/he should certainly abide by it. By the
way, I have no problems with the Social Contract, my gripes were
with certain parts of the DFSG but certainly not all of it.
> "Agreeing" with the DFSG in a fairly important part of that -- our major
> aim is to produce a free system, and if we can't even agree on what that
> means then we're not going to get *anywhere*.
If we all agreed on the DFSG then how would change ever occur? The DFSG
is currently being modified due in part to disagreement, isn't it?
Difference of opinion can be a good thing. It can fuel progress. It can
also hinder it but it but is up to us to ensure that progress is made. We
shouldn't just avoid such a situation by attempting to ensure that
everyone agrees.
Please understand that what I am saying is that it should be alright for
developers to have different opinions of the DFSG or whatever else.
However, if they want to be Debian developers then they should abide the
Social Contract and the DFSG but not necessarily agree with them.
-Ossama
Reply to: