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

Re: General Resolution: Removing non-free, Draft 2

Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:

>  * Changing the social contract without consulting the affected parties
> of the contract (in this case, in particular, Debian's user community)
> is wrong. So as well as doing the GR, the proposers should also attempt
> to poll or gain the consensus of debian-user, or similar.

The social contract is with the Free Software Community.  The GNU
Project was always disturbed by the existence of non-free in Debian.
Paragraph Five has the effect of undermining free software.  It is
ludicrous to see the current Paragraph Five as a promise to keep
undermining free software forever.  The Free Software Community is
that group of people who prefer free software to non-free software,
and work to make the former better and undermine the latter.

>  * non-free software remains necessary to many of our users and many of
> our developers, so non-free packages will continue being maintained
> elsewhere without the benefits of the Debian infrastructure, needlessly
> using more of our developers' time and for a worse result. Similarly,
> our users will continue using non-free software, but it will be more
> difficult to find, and get support for.

Not of the non-free maintainers can agree on an archive, set it up,
and run it.  I believe that they are competent and talented people who
know how to configure a few FTP servers and set up a BTS, and make it
work with a fairly small amount of effort.


Reply to: