Re: [rant] Re: Consequences of moving Emacs Manuals to non-free
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> writes:
> On 24 Mar 2006, Miles Bader said:
>> 2006/3/25, Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
>>> Well, users, and developers, who disagree with our principles can
>>> still get the non-fee documentation by adding one line to their apt
>>> sources list. If you, as a developer or a user, think the docs are
>>> free, why should you care how debian has classified it? You can
>>> still get it on your box. So the interests of users and developers
>>> who disagree with debian are not being catered to is an argument
>>> that does not fly.
>> I think one complaint is that many debian users want to avoid what
>> they consider non-free stuff. Previously this was simple, if their
>> idea of "non-free" corresponded with Debian's: they could just not
>> have non-free in their sources.list. However now, it will be
>> harder, because Debian is going to group desirable "free" (from the
>> user's viewpoint, not debian's) stuff together with undesirable
>> "really non-free" stuff.
> In other words, people are complaining that Debian developers
> views do not coincide with their own?
More like that Debian packagers' views don't correspond with either
the upstream free software authors' nor the users' views, and that
Debian feels it has the right to teach both morals, making use of the
means provided freely from upstream.
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum