Re: Discussion - non-free software removal
Hello Steven,
Thanks for your thoughtful mail. Let me first state that I'm not familiar
with *angband, so please bear that in mind. Now, on to my responses:
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 02:18:16PM +0000, Steven Fuerst wrote:
> I'd like to see Zangband, Angband, and Moria still be apt-gettable.
I think you stand a good chance of that happening even if my proposed
resolution passes.
> I use debian, and have over the past three years - but I really can't
> see how removing these essentially open-source projects from debian
> helps in any way. I am already attempting to rewrite most of the
> Zangband source so that the license can be changed to GPL - but
> forceably removing it from my distribution because I can't code fast
> enough makes me angry. Robert Ruhlmann (the 'upstream' maintainer of
Well, the first thing I should point out is this: (to those that would
flame me for mentioning it again, we're not talking about a Debian developer
here...)
As things stand today, the Debian distribution already does not contain
non-free software. That is, our operating system, CDs, etc. do not have
that software. Our FTP site and mirror networks, however, do carry
non-free. So, to be precise, Zangband had never been a part of the Debian
distribution.
> Angband) has already changed distributions from Debian to Gentoo due to
> silliness like this. I can see myself following if this project heads
> towards the direction of idealism, instead of facing reality and
> realising that some open source code happens to predate the debian
> mission statement.
This sounds like a quibble with DFSG, the Debian Free Software Guidelines,
rather than with my proposal.
As it is, the license for Zangband quite clearly excludes use in corporate
settings. While we may quibble on what is "free enough," the fact remains
that for a substantial number of people, that license is not free enough.
Now you are obviously free to choose whatever license you like for software
you produce. Debian, as a project, has decided that our distribution will
include only Free software that meets a certain set of guidelines -- as we
are free to do. We decided back in 1997 that keeping the distribution
populated solely with Free software was a better way to promote the
long-term quality, breadth, and vitality of our operating system.
I appreciate the work of people like you to get code re-licensed under a
more favorable license such as the GPL. That way, it becomes easier for
others to contribute to our codebase -- and in this case, it would allow
businesses to do that. That way, Debian developers can fix bugs in
packages, no matter who is paying them (if anyone).
> The debian project has to realise it has users and upstream maintainers
> as well as the people who create packages. Your GR totally ignores this
> fact.
I don't see how you can say it ignores that. Can you elaborate?
Reply to: