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

[Adam Rogoyski <rogoyski@cs.utexas.edu>]

On Wed, 7 Jun 2000, Jim Lynch wrote:

> 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.

   Please read section 5 of the social contract.  Debian is a platform for
non-free software.  If it were not, parts of Debian would be violation of
points 5 and 6 of the Debian Free Software Guidelines, and Debian would
not be able to be released as free software.  It is supported in the
social contract and DFSG.
   I feel that having the man power, the capacity, and the will to support
the current non-free and contrib sections, and then refusing work to
continue to support these sections is not only contrary to the Social
Contract, but contrary to the DFSG.  Even though the DFSG is a work
refering to a software's license, I feel the implications of this proposal
violate those guidelines in the spirit of Debian as a whole.  


> I do not stand for non-free software in general.

   Debian does, and has created a very real and working compromise in
which non-free software can be obtained securely and confidently from
users, without releasing this software as "Debian."

   Adam