OK. I can't remember what my position was in 1997 :) As a Debian developer: 1.) I don't run non-free software under Linux. I eat my own dogfood. [For legacy purposes, I maintain a dual-boot machine so my four year old can use some non-free Windows educational programs] 2.) I encourage the use of Debian everywhere I can at work and at home and in the charities for which I do some voluntary work. One of the selling points, for me, is that I can give someone 7 CD's worth of genuinely Free Software, set it up for them and _know_ that I'm in the clear for distribution/use etc. The GR doesn't change my stance but I'm not sure it will help clarify the issue for anyone else. [All IMHO] The crux is the DFSG / non-DFSG distinction. Everything DFSG that has no dependencies on non-free software goes into main: contrib also contains DFSG software but software which depends on non-free AIUI. [Semi-serious interim solution] Rename main to DFSG-free (or Debian-free, for short). Move contrib and non-free together into a new section (non-DFSG-free or non-Debian for short). --- Trying to rationalise why, for example, I can install an installer which will download/compile Pine source but not a ready-made .deb and to explain that to someone else is non-trivial. [A very good friend has more than once accused me of "free software fascism" - I don't like to think of it that way, but he feels _very_ strongly]. As an organisation, we need to stress the Social Contract and the DFSG as factors which help keep us honest. As DD's, we choose to submit ourselves to the Social Contract and to show that we care about Free Software: in this, we are no better or worse than other humans but we voluntarily choose to impose restrictions on our work in an effort to build a better distribution for "our users". [The closest analogy I can find is religious: monks/nuns and brothers would all admit they are ordinary men and women - they choose voluntarily to submit themselves to a higher standard of conduct and stricter rules than they would expect of others, but doing that doesn't make them intrinsically "better people". The other analogy is of the Castalian society in the Glass Bead Game by Hesse] Non-free software is not intrinsically evil of itself, nor are those who use it or develop for it: I can contend that Free Software is always preferable but I shouldn't force it on others against their will but rather lead by example, IMHO. This argument could go on and on for a long time :( Please, moderation in tone will serve the Debian image well as will a coherently argued rationale - rather than flaming the living shit out of each other :) Andy
Attachment:
pgp0lQ_iIyZis.pgp
Description: PGP signature