Re: [debian-devel] Re: Is vrms really still a Virtual Richard M. Stallman?
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 04:04:49PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Magosányi Árpád wrote:
>
> > A levelez??m azt hiszi, hogy Florian Weimer a következ??eket írta:
> > > Let me rephrase my statement. "non-free" does not mean "not
> > > conforming to the law".
> >
> > Non-free does mean "not conforming to the internal law of the
> > project".
>
> The Social Contract mandates that Debian offers non-free software for
> download, so you can hardly argue that doing so breaks Debian's own
> laws.
Ehhh?
"Thus, although non-free software isn't a part of Debian, we
support its use, and we provide infrastructure (such as our
bug-tracking system and mailing lists) for non-free software
packages." -- Excerpt from the social-contract
This definitely does not _mandate_ that Debian offers non-free software,
it says that we currently do so. Something mandatory is something that
has to be done. Debian does not _have_ to offer non-free software
(at least not to the best of my knowledge. If we do, I might have to go
looking for a new project to be a part of...)
Note: I'm not arguing against your protest regarding "Debian's own
laws", but rather your incorrect use of the word mandate.
Regards: David
--
/) David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /) Northern lights wander (\
// Maintainer of the v2.0 kernel // Dance across the winter sky //
\) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Full colour fire (/
Reply to: