Re: Moving contrib and non-free of master.debian.org

[Rafael Caetano dos Santos <rcaetano@linux.ime.usp.br>]

I'm not developer yet, but I'll give my opinion nonetheless.

Wichert Akkerman - Debian project leader writes:
(...)
> The social contract has as the very first item `Debian Will Remain 100%
> Free Software'. So we need to do something to make once again clear
> to everyone exactly what Debian is and show more clearly what we don't
> consider to be free. I see two ways of doing that:

I think it's a good idea to stress "what Debian is" and "what is
free software".  However, I don't think that's enough.

I think we should try to determine what are the most used non-free
programs and:

(i) try to show the users that we have a free software equivalent that is
as good (or better) technically as the program in question. E.g., mutt vs.
pine;
or
(ii) support (really) the development of such equivalent software.

I know this is a bit vague, and somewhat difficult to attain.  But
just saying that "Debian is 100% free software" while distributing
pine, even if we say that "the non-free directory is not part of Debian",
is a bit hypocritical.

bye 
    Rafael Caetano <rcaetano@linux.ime.usp.br>