[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Packaging proprietary software

You should repent your sins
Thinking proprietary is a sin in the free software community

Making a fully free replacement is a much better way, don't taint your operating system or kernel!

Might as well change to windows then, because running non-free isn't that bad eh?

The free software movements is about keeping software free if possible.
Non-free software is very rarely a good idea, a last resort hack.

Many people would rather be without than with non-free.

You use a free software operating system, so you should contribute back if you write something
not use stuff that costs money/is without sourcecode, that isn't helping back, that is doing the opposite
it is about love/freedom and contributing back that love/freedom.

The more nonfree software we get in free software OSes, the worse it will get.
then people might as well just use Microsoft.

Because then they're not free anymore.

So you are asking free software devs to help you make the OS not free.
You see the problem?

I would spend all that time developing a free alternative instead, and researching myself.

The only non-free that people get tempted with today is flash and non-free wifi firmware
Both should be overcome in the near future with html5 probably, and newer chipsets.

It seems people are using flash less and less, because the language is getting so powerful now.
At least I hope so :)

On Thu, 09 Oct 2014, Brian May wrote:

> On 9 October 2014 09:03, Ben Finney <ben+debian@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
> > On that point: It is in poor taste to declare up front that you have no
> > intention of helping the free software community (which is what it means
> > to release proprietary software), and then in the same message ask that
> > same community for help in doing this.
> >
> It is possible to release the source to your packaging as open source with
> instructions on how to download the proprietary code and create the Debian
> packages. This means you can't distribute the built packages. I have done
> this. https://github.com/VPAC/tivsm
> Another option is to have a deb installer package that downloads the
> proprietary code at install time. I think the Adobe flash plugin does this.
> This means you can distribute the "binary" packages, however may not be a
> good choice if there is no anonymous download or upstream is likely to
> change the URL.
> So it is possible to package proprietary software and help the community in
> doing so.
> -- 
> Brian May <brian@microcomaustralia.com.au>

Reply to: