On Sun, 11 Jun 2000, Jules Bean wrote:
> > I had thought that the purpose of the `DFSG-free' discriminant was to
> > establish which packages could be distributed without onerous
> > restrictions. It now appears that this pragmatic distinction is
> > retrospectively being reimposed onto the history of Debian as an
> > ideological principle. (That is, it appears this way to someone who only
> > heard of Debian in 1996 and only started following developments from
> > 1998).
> That is I fear going to far the other way.
> Certainly the majority of vocal participants in this debate (although
> whether they represent an actual majority of developers would need a
> vote) have agreed that debian's goal to create a (very) good operating
> system is, in the end, more important than the goal of creating a very
> free one.
Ok, understood. As I said, I was speaking from a position of partial
ignorance. I don't feel that this invalidates much of the rest of what I
was saying, and in particular would like a clarification of where s4 of
the Social Contract would stand wrt the proposed s5.