Re: FYI: GNU Emacs Manual to be moved to non-free
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> writes:
> > I am sure almost no one consider FSF's manuals unfree just because
> > DSFG thinks they are,
>
> As far as I am concerned, the DFSG is the canonical litmus
> test ... so I don't see how your statement can be
> correct.
"Almost" was the key word above.
FSF is one of organizations i would consider authorities on
definitions of "freedom". DSFG surely is an authority too, for me.
But just because DFSG does not agree with FSF on one point, does not
mean you have to defeat the whole purpose of "free/unfree" separation
by putting FSF's documentation nonfree. . Calling FSF documentation
itself unfree is like... never mind, i just can't think of anything.
In short, it's just ridiculous.
> Well, as far as we are concerned, things are either free,
> depend on non-free things, or are non free. We do not distinguish
> between types of non-freeness -- like free for non-commercial use,
well, you might as well. It's not like debian hasn't made compromises
before. Including a "nonfree" section in debian itself was a
compromise. And it's not like we are asking you to commit a major
blasphemy here. At least you could put it in a "controvertial"
section instead of "nonfree". By forcing us to put "nonfree" in our
sources.list, you are going to defeat the very purpose of the
"nonfree" section for us.
> This is not a political thing.
Exactly! That is what i am saying. See? I don't even mind even if
you label FSF's documents nonfree (while you and FSF work out
issues).
_All I request is that you allow us users (who still consider them
free, and I bet, most of us do!) a way to continue to use them easily
while still keeping the rest of the "nonfree" world off my debian
box._
FSF and DFSG both watch out for our freedoms. Arising of some
differences of opinions is natural. What is important is that you
respect each other, work the differences out, and while they are being
worked out, allow us users to continue to make use of the debian
system productively... If one labels something as "free", that is
good enough for me, the user. I want to consider anythign as free as
long as either FSF or DFSG calls it free, and want to use it.
Getting "Free Software Foundation"'s own manuals labeled unfree and
removed from sources.list is just so unimaginable...
So, I end my posts with a repeat of this request:
_All I request is that you allow us users (who still consider them
free, and I bet, most of us do!) a way to continue to use them easily
while still keeping the rest of the "nonfree" world off my debian
box._
DG http://gnufans.net/~deego/
--
Reply to: