Re: General Resolution: Removing non-free
John Goerzen proclaimed:
> Whereas at one time, most everyone used non-free software such as
> Netscape for web browsing, acroread for PDF reading, or xv for graphic
> viewing, there are quality free replacements for all of these
> programs. Therefore, the rationale of "we need non-free for usable
> standard system" no longer applies.
> There has been some discussion about whether mozilla is ready for
> prime time right now. The point can be argued. However, let me put
> forth the following observations: 1) it will almost certainly be ready
> by the time woody is released (in about 2 years, of the potato time is
> any guide); and 2) using one program to justify the continued support
> of all current non-free programs is a weak argument at best.
What if there is a set of programs that become vital but are non-free in
the future? I'd consider something like rvplayer important for any Linux
> 5. The existance of the non-free section is being used as a cop-out by
> those that seek to peddle non-free wares.
I thought the goal of Debian was to produce the best operating system
possible. I did not know a Jihad against non-free software was the goal.
I always interpreted the Social Contract to have a tone that was 'Live and
Let Live' and not 'Live Free or Die'.
"Now, let's all turn around and pay attention to me again."
-- Homer J. Simpson
Sudhakar C13n http://www.aunet.org/thaths/ Lead Indentured Slave