Re: Why the GR is not necessary
Jim Lynch <email@example.com> writes:
> NO. The social contract is between debian and the free-software community.
> And I suspect the other party agrees with me.
As a member of the free software community, I disagree with you.
> This is tedious... but: the other interested party is the free software
..and IMHO this resolution will damage the free software community
(we've had that argument elsewhere). I wish you'd stop trying to claim
the moral high ground.
> If I were to compromise, I might suggest that the social contract should
> do more to encourage education about free software and therefore use
> thereof. It's possible I might accept a policy that says an item of non-free
> software can and will be dropped when a suitable free alternative is found
> or created.
That would be reasonable, as long as the free alternative provided all
the functionality of the non-free one.
> Straw poll: how many of the non-free supporters have read the GPL? How
> many understand how software patents restrict what you can write about?
How about those of us who have read, understood these and support free
software but think this GR is the wrong way forwards?
"At least you know where you are with Microsoft."
"True. I just wish I'd brought a paddle."