Re: Packages with RFCs deleted
Le Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 12:05:26PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit a écrit :
> With your argument, gcc would be in non-free right now...
This is why it has been proposed on this list that original sources
containing non-free elements that are not part of the software could be
allowed in main, as long as no binary package would contain them.
Much of the free software development is about creating replacements of
non-free component to build a free OS with free applications. But to my
ears "removing files" does not sound like "creating" something. It just
does not bring anything new to the world, makes nothing easier, and does
not solve any problem other than cosmetical... If gcc-orig.tar.gz is not
free, I still do not understand how we can say that there is more
freedom after gcc-dfsg.gz is created by removing files. The starting
point is the same. The way that Debian users ultimately depend on
gcc-orig.tar.gz is the same. The only difference is that the non-free
software transits on a personnal DD machine instead of the official
For sure, one could think the removals as a service to the Debian users
which are not interested in the binary packages and who want to be sure
that a documentations's licence is free before reading it in order to
know how they can modify it, because of course, one can not blindly
modify any DFSG-free document, some have some requrements which are
deemed acceptabe. Also, even if the whole source would be in public
domain, there are other ways in which modifications are allowed and
disallowed, licences are only one stone in the intellecutal property
edifice. So which value is the extra information provided by the file
removals, and how many users appreciate it?
I think that shipping the non-programmatic, non-modifiable works in
non-free binary packages generated from source packages located in main
would better deliver the information.
Have a nice day,
Current holder of the "most stupide post ever" award...
for how long ?