[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Seconded, sponsored. (was Re: General Resolution: Removing non-free)


  the second and sponsorship
  the signature
  some reasoning

Here's the message:

In the message identified as

  Message-ID: <87d7lu2n9d.fsf@complete.org>,

  John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org>

made a General Resolution whose subject line reads

  Subject: General Resolution: Removing non-free.

I second this proposal, and permit my name/debian email address
to appear as sponsor should this still be needed.

and here's the detached signature:

Version: 2.6.3ia


some reasoning:

We don't need non-free. We don't have to give up working on it. It does
not have to be under Debian's umbrella which in turn is under the umbrella
of Software In The Public Interest, Inc. It should not be, because non-free
software is arguably not in the public interest.

Now that apt and apt-get can be used to create debian-compatible archives,
Someone Else [tm] can house and distribute the non-free software. It's
easy to make it available. We don't have to be the one to do it. If a
debian developer wants to work on non-free software, NO problem. The archive
can and will be at an address that does not contain the string "debian".
So any argument of the form "replace the software then we'll talk again"
is answerable with "Take it elsewhere. You can now."

We shouldn't be any sort of platform for non-free software. It's not
what debian stands for, it's not supportive of our social contract in
its original spirit and it's personally not what I want to do. I do
not stand for non-free software in general. I would rather that I can
present Debian free software to a school and any or all of its
students and say "make what you will of this. There are no restrictions 
unless you try to restrict the freedom you yourself have been given under 
the license".

Non-free as defined by debian is a clump-together of groups of things
that were placed in non-free for different reasons. I think that there
might usefully be a split up of non-free software into sections identified
by the reason they have been put there (patent, non-us, crypto, etc).
That could be done by whoever decides to take responsibility for it after
it's gone from debian.


Jim Lynch       Finger for pgp key
as Laney College CIS admin:  jim@laney.edu   http://www.laney.edu/~jim/
as Debian developer:         jwl@debian.org  http://www.debian.org/~jwl/

Reply to: