On Tue, 2004-06-01 at 07:01, Marek Habersack wrote: > On Mon, May 31, 2004 at 11:32:02PM -0500, Joe Wreschnig scribbled: > > On Mon, 2004-05-31 at 22:01, Marek Habersack wrote: > > > I fully agree with you on that and you've given very worthy examples of > > > applications that replace the non-free ones. But note one thing - NONE of > > > their authors came moaning that "acrobat is bad, it has to be removed, guys, > > > remove it" - but they sat down and wrote the software. And what I was > > > talking about were people who go talking about something being wrong, about > > > politics, theoritizing and pointing fingers but doing nothing in order to > > > change anything. If somebody comes and says "the tg driver is bad, because > > > it is non free and I will remove it" and offers no alternative then, in my > > > book, that person loses _all_ the credibility as a software developer and > > > a person that can be trusted to do some task which requires responsibility. > > > > So, if no free alternative exists, any proprietary program (whether we > > have a legal right to distribute or not) can be in Debian if someone > > packages it. (Don't respond with "I'm not saying that", because you > > are.) > Am I? Where? Where am I saying that an illegal program should be > distributed? AutoCAD was given as an example - the example didn't include > discussion about the legal rights to distribute that. I assumed that, for > the sake of discussion, the person had the right to distribute the > hypothetical AutoCAD. So let me ammend my statement, just for you: I was referring to the tg3 driver. Debian did not have any legal right to distribute the firmware in it, yet you are saying it was irresponsible to remove it. -- Joe Wreschnig <piman@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part