Re: General Resolution: Removing non-free
How many times do I have to repeat it.
DEBIAN DOES NOT INLCUDE NON-FREE NOW.
There is NO CHANGE to our distribution by accepting this proposal.
The change is, at worst, to the archive and a few sources.lists.
Adam McKenna <email@example.com> writes:
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2000 at 06:11:39AM -0400, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > Choice versus imposition is a continuum, not a binary state. Do you submit
> > that the failure of a grocery store to carry a specific item of food is an
> > imposition upon you? But let us have a better analogy. What about a
> > health food store that refuses to carry unhealthy products like fried
> > cheeseburgers? Are the patrons of such a store being imposed upon?
> I don't like this analogy. What this GR is proposing is more like a full
> service grocery store deciding to become a health food specialty store. Do
> you think the health food store would retain the customers of the grocery
> store? Doubtful. If it had been the intention of the original writers of
> the Debian Social Contract to keep out all non-free software (or even
> mostly-free software), I believe they would have written that into the
> original contract. To change it now borders on malice.
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com
John Goerzen <firstname.lastname@example.org> www.complete.org
Sr. Software Developer, Progeny Linux Systems, Inc. www.progenylinux.com
#include <std_disclaimer.h> <email@example.com>