Counter Proposal (was Re: General Resolution: Removing non-free)
On Wed, Jun 07, 2000 at 10:31:21AM -0400, Branden Robinson wrote:
> A brave assertion. But then you have to think about this carefully-crafted
> document and wonder why it doesn't read like this:
> 5. We Will Support Programs That Don't Meet Our Free-Software Standards
> We will maintain "contrib" and "non-free" areas in our FTP archive for
> this software. We encourage CD manufacturers to read the licenses of
> software packages in these directories and determine if they can
> distribute that software on their CDs. We will support the use of
> non-free software in Debian, and we will provide infrastructure (such as
> our bug-tracking system and mailing lists) for non-free software
nice idea. i propose that we modify the Social Contract so that it does
Anyone willing to second this?
> So? Why doesn't it read like that?
an oversight. it seemed self-evident and obvious at the time.