Re: Can we have a debate?
On Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 10:27:11AM -0700, Alex Romosan wrote:
> Francesco Tapparo <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > > Some of us believe in the needs of our users. (Actually, I suspect most
> > > or all of us do, whether we or they agree that non-free serves those
> > > needs or not)
> > I am not sure about that. Surely this is not true in my case: The
> > Debian ojective come first, the Debian user after. I work for my
> > cause, not for the cause of others,
> comments like this make me wish i never got involved with the debian
> project. we do have an implicit obligation to our users, if not
> explicit, as the social contract (still) says:
I did'nt say we must forget the needs of our users. I said the Debian
objective come first:a very different thing.
Let suppose a lot of our users ask us to put proprietary software in main;
should we do that? No, because the Debian objective come first. If Debian
would put non-free software in main it would no Debian anymore.
So your statement that our users come before or even with the same importance
than the Debian objective (to build a completely free operating system), is
> 4.Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software
> We will be guided by the needs of our users and the free-software
> now i understand why you guys support this stupid resolution. you
> don't want the lowly users to interfere with your cause. you comment
it is not correct to generalize my thinking to all the supporters of the GR.
Perhaps they agree with my point of view, perhaps not: I do not know.
Francesco Tapparo | email@example.com
fight for your software freedoms: www.fsf.org | firstname.lastname@example.org