Hi, On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 02:45:35AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > What is unpersuasive about: > > Every day a non-free package is "better" than a free alternative > (or no alternative at all) is a day in which less work is > potentially done by Debian developers and others on a free > alternative to create or improve it, a day in which there is > less public clamor for such a tool, and a day in which there is > less visible market need apparent to a company that may be > willing to sponsor or underwrite the development of a free > alternative in furtherance of its own ends.[1] > ? > > Is it your belief that most people in the Free Software community would > rather do nothing than work on Free Software? /That/ is exactly why it's unpersuasive. Just as unpersuasive as the argument that good things are only developed when monetary incentives exist. Either we're willing to develop free alternatives in the face of non-free solutions, or we're not. But I don't think /artificially/ making the use and support of non-free harder will provide any incentive to work harder on Free Software. People will already spend as much time developing free software as they have time and energy to. But priorities will generally be determined by personal need for the software, public recognition and the feeling you're doing something useful for others. Not by artificially raising barriers to use existing, non-free software. If it were only that easy to get work and dedication from people by kidding them. I think that people spend all that time and energy only when they see a /real/ value in doing it. And writing Free Software has such value. But merely making existing non-free software less visible doesn't improve the value of writing free alternatives as perceived by potential developers. That's that piece is entirely unpersuasive. Cheers, Emile. -- E-Advies / Emile van Bergen | emile@e-advies.info tel. +31 (0)70 3906153 | http://www.e-advies.info
Attachment:
pgp6_GJU_TisV.pgp
Description: PGP signature