Why non-free? (Was: Re: KDE)
I think we need to look at the non-free/contrib/etc. issue from the
perspective of the end user who just buys a CD set and installs it, since
this probably accounts for the bulk of the users who are unaware of the
difference. These users are unlikely to be aware of the difference, even
if the directories are moved to different virtual servers. Anything which
is done to make the installation more inconvenient in the name of making
the user more aware of the differences will simply be removed by anyone
making disk sets, since the convenience of the user/customer is and should
be the first priority.
It would appear to me that the real solution to this is to leave the
directories and server alone, and setup any packages which are not GPL to
display the use/licensing terms for each of these packages during the
installation process, allowing the user to accept or reject the
installation of each of these packages after reading the terms of use.
This eliminates the issue of the user being unaware of the non-GPL status
of these packages, regardless of how they are acquired or what directory
they are stored in.
Shannon C. Dealy
dealy@deatech.com
Reply to: