Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 11:06:35PM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
> Glenn Maynard writes:
> >> That does not mean that software freedom should be the only freedom
> >> that Debian pursues, but it does not help to pretend that Free
> >> Software is the same thing as Free License Texts or Free Reference
> >> Documentation or Free Speech.
> > It does not help to pretend that Free Software is not the same thing as
> > Free License Texts or Free Reference Documentation or Free Speech.
> > Not very convincing, is it? :)
> To adapt an analogy that someone used earlier, when you go to a store,
> you might find fonts, images, or other data in a box in the software
> section. However, you are not likely to find a specification for
> TCP/IP in the software section, and you are not likely to find a print
> of Starry Night in the software section either.
Ah that's an interesting point. TCP/IP is a standard, so it's non free...
Maybe all implementation of that should go in contrib so, because
they 'depend' on a piece of 'something' which is not free. So, we
have to move the whole kernel there, and oh sure, libc too...
Probably someone should clarify me better what's 'depending' means,
why a document which define a standard is non-free but
a program based on that standard is not in contrib? Who wrote that
program did read the standard and use it to write the program.
So, the program indeed _depends_ on that standard. And the standard IS
the document which describe it. So there's a direct dependency.
And POSIX? Mmmm...
Francesco P. Lovergine