Re: Social Contract: Practical Implications
[ Gah, I've been trying not to get drawn into this shit. ]
Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>> The GPL also does not adhere to the DFSG. Previously, this didn't
>> matter because the GPL is a license, and not software.
>Shall I repeat this again? This hasn't changed. "Debian will remain 100%
>free software", as an English sentence, includes the meaning "Debian will
>remain 100% software". No room for non-software.
You keep on asserting that. Your interpretation of that phrase is not
the only one possible. Another possible (and apparently quite common)
interpretation is "100% of the software in Debian will remain free".
A lot of the problem in interpretation can be understood if you
consider what people are focussing on. Many Debian developers
(shockingly, I know) are and have been actually trying to produce a
high-quality free operating system. As most of us are software (sorry,
_program_) developers trying to get the job done, pedantry over the
exact wording and spirit of the DFSG and SC as applied to license
texts and fonts has often not been considered necessary.
_Please_ can you drop this hyperbole and get on with something
productive instead? For example, ISTR you were working on several of
the kernel drivers to make them load binary firmware from
userland. How's that going?
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. email@example.com
"Every time you use Tcl, God kills a kitten." -- Malcolm Ray