Re: Moving contrib and non-free of master.debian.org
Shane King wrote:
> The pragmatic approach is just as hypocritical, if not more so. You've
> basically said it's ok for debian to be pragmatic while telling the users
> they should not be pragmatic and instead rely on only software which
> conforms to the DFSG. That is hypocricy, pure and simple.
<flame on> I get emotional on these type things! (=:]
What you're saying seems to equate roughly to: "Well we don't live in a perfect,
utopian world, so lets all shoot ourselves, we are doomed already." As opposed
to saying "Well we don't live in a perfect utopian world, BUT it seems we are
making headway towards it... Let's keep going, building on it all the time
pragmatically. Eventually the faults may be overcome through time, effort,
patience, and diligence."
> I'm not a developer,
Neither am I, (I keep trying to get my key signed and it never happens! :)
But I too am an ardent user and supporter... 'Cause Debian's Da BOMB!
> but rather just a user, but from the outside looking
> in there's nothing worse than a person or organisation that doesn't
> practice what it preaches. In my opinion, debian should either do without the
But nothing, and no one is perfect... you just can't afford to be perfect. But I
think Debian mostly practices what it preaches... and THAT is for sure. The
number of non-free stuffs Debian uses you can count on one hand, or maybe two...
and that number diminishes all the time, as free, robust replacements become
available. That is the best approach, and I'll stick by my stance doggedly, as
I'm sure most of the rest of Debiandom will do. :)
> non-free software, or stop suggesting other people shouldn't use non-free
> software (and in the case of this server move, it seem actively trying to
> make it "harder" to do so).
That's what RMS is for. :D
I think Debian is more into the "let's build a system that is completely, or at
least as much as possible, built from free software and keep trying to make it
more and more free all the time, and at the same time keep improving the overall
high technical quality of it all, and MAKE IT WORK!"
> If the FSF can do it, I see no reason why Debian
> shouldn't bite the bullet, make the sacrifices necessary, and do it too.
Debian's "charter" (from my perspective at least) is not to espouse pristine
pure free software use only, but rather to be dedicated to the idea, and
pragmatically try to attain the perfect pure free goal, but recognizing that
sometimes you have to bite the bullet and use non-free software sometimes as
free alternatives may not be as good temporarily. There are two things at work
here:
1) Debian's commitment to keeping the "main" system, "non-free independent".
which it IS, and always will be. That is stated clearly in the Social Contract.
2) Debian's commitment to using mostly free software, but not always in it's
maintenance of it's own servers in a pragmatic way, but all the while looking
for free alternatives and using them when they can do the job just as good if
not more so than the non-free stuffs.
> Need I quote the Debian social contract that states:
>
> "4. Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software"
>
> This does not say "Our Priorities are pragmatic and technical". Instead it
> places freeness ahead of any technical superiority. Unless I'm mistaken,
> all developers are required to "agree with and pledge to uphold the Debian
> Social Contract", which makes me wonder how this non-free software got on
> the debian servers and has remained there for so long? Some people
> obviously haven't taken their pledge seriously...
Well, the Uses were mentioned first... so there. :P
It would be a disservice to the users to use a shoddy free software tool on
Debian's servers as opposed to a non-free one that did the job.
But of course, you can be rest assured that the Debian bunch will continue to
look for alternatives, or maybe even develop their own to fill the need for a
free replacement as time goes on.
But, in spite of this usage of non-free tools on Debian's SERVERS, Debian is
still 100% committed to never allowing the 'main' Debian system from ever
becoming dependent on non-free software. And that is true today, and hopefully
will continue to be true... 'Cause Free Software is just plain better!
> I'm not saying non-free software is right or wrong, I simply think it
> absurd that debian can be running so much of it behind the scenes while
> taking steps to distance itself from it in its more public face.
But they are not hiding the fact that they are running it (non-free software)
themselves. It is publicly known. (at least I know. :)
> I'd say that at the moment, it would appear that the Emperor has no
> clothes...
BAH!
If you would like to fork the entire Debian System and think you can do it all
with free software, go for it... We will all be watching to learn from how you
do it.
Debian Original, and Debian Ultra Free...
But which will actually survive to see a day when it *can* be completely run and
maintained with only free software?
</flame off>
--Brock
--------------------- PGP key ID: FED76A3D <brock@cyberdude.com> 4 / 5 / 1999
__ _ Debian GNU R. Brock Lynn (bytopian on irc #debian)
/ /(_)_ __ _ ___ __ http://www.debian.org/ irc.openprojects.net
/ / | | '_ \| | | \ \/ / Free Software!
/ /__| | | | | |_| |> < Remember that's "Free" as in Freedom!,
\____/_|_| |_|\__,_/_/\_\ Not Free as in price. Debian's 'Da Bomb!
Reply to: