Re: General Resolution: Removing non-free
Adam McKenna <email@example.com> writes:
> I don't know if the "free software community" was disturbed. Maybe RMS and
> the FSF were disturbed, and I understand Debian is under significant
> political pressure from them to remove non-free (and I believe that is the
> reason for this proposal)
I suspect I would have heard if that were the case; it is certainly
true that my support has nothing to do with rms and I've heard nothing
from him on the subject recently. I believe he is content with the
current way the Debian archive works. If you think he is some kind of
Comintern acting behind the scenes to pull puppet strings, then you
can rest assured that he is certainly not pulling mine.
What I think I meant was that the compromise was made to meet two
competing ends: one was the original Debian manifesto, which excluded
all non-free software, and the other was those who wanted non free
software added to Debian. Those who held to the original Debian
manifesto were what I meant by the "free software community".
> All that being said, I don't think this propsal is a good idea because it
> removes usefullness from debian and smells of fanaticism. If the free
> software community is confused as to the status of non-free, then we should
> take steps to clarify that. IMHO removing non-free entirely is a much more
> radical measure than is called for.
Can you please suggest some concrete steps to end the confusion then?
Perhaps some of us might be willing to abandon our support for the GR
if we knew that some of the problems with the current system were
being address in some way.