Re: General Resolution: Removing non-free
Jeff Licquia <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
<snip: all of this is myself or Jeff>
> > > > Because a) You can get CDs with non-free on then, which are useful,
> > >
> > > Which you could still do, assuming someone cared enough to set up an
> > > alternate non-free archive.
> > Yes, but we have the infrastructure in place now. I still don't see
> > what we gain by throwing it out.
> Technically, it's pretty obvious that the proposal is a bit loser; the
I'm sorry, I don't understand your point here.
> question before us is whether the non-technical gains are worth the
I also argue that in fact it's shooting ourself in the foot
ideologically as well as practically.
> I don't see this question as stopping anyone from any uploading
> activity they may be taking part in. Rather, the proposal seeks to
It would do though - I would no longer be able to upload trn to
non-free/news, for instance.
> ensure that Debian resources are not used for such pursuits unless
> those pursuits are in line with our stance on free software.
By producing the best distribution (which, althought excluding
non-free software supports those users who wish to use it), and by
making it a community effort, and making Debian free, as we do now, we
have a powerful tool for evangelising about free software to people.
By accepting this GR, we'd lose that. People would think us (and by
extension the free software community as a whole) to be ideological
extremists; we'd lose a lot of good will and "moderate" supporters.
As we do now
"At least you know where you are with Microsoft."
"True. I just wish I'd brought a paddle."