On Sat, Jan 11, 2003 at 08:29:07PM +0100, Klaus Knopper wrote: > On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 07:22:23PM +0100, Bernhard Reiter wrote: > > > OpenOffice is missing in your list of programs to remove for a > > > "completeley Free Software" CD, for the same reason you recommended > > > gimp-nonfree for removal. Possibly also KDE. > > > > This is a work in progress. > > We based our decision on the work of the Debian project. > > AFAIK openoffice and KDE are becoming part of Debian GNU/Linux. > > (not of the non-free or contrib sections). > > So, whatever the Debian project decides to put into main, will qualify as > "free" everywhere? The Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG) by definition aim to describe the same conditions as the four freedoms the FSFE uses to explain Free Software. The Debian people naturally try to follow their own guidelines and do valuable work to clear the licensing situations up. As they deal with many packages there are always some where the sitation is not yet cleared up. The "Freie Software Knoppix" is an effort by Intevation. We build on the efforts of the FSF and Debian people and then do our own research and thinking. However this is and ongoing process. Usually the Debian people do good work, so as the first step their evaluation is a good to start with. > > As for the patent issues we debated, there cannot be drawn a clear line > > for all cases. The GIF saw real problems with the patent, > > which means this a real danger. And gimp-nonfree is in Debian non-free. > > Thus your question might be more broadly put to the > > appropriate Debian lists. > > As far as I know, there is no "official" OpenOffice Debian package. Yes. > Also, I don't quite understand why gimp's GIF-Writer qualifies as > "non-free", whereas the OpenOffice GIF-Writer apparently is OK > with your definition of "free". It is not my definition of Free Software we are talking about. Many experts in the field do have a common definition. You can see that in the criteria of the FSF, the SPI and OSI. Still your question is a valid one and needs to be answered sooner or later. Note that I'm not the only one to answer it. > > > Could you explain why tgif is on the list of programs to remove? > > > tgif is in Debian main. > > > > Oh, that is seems to be a bug, triggered by the entry in the > > available file on the last Knoppix releases. > > (in Knoppix 2003-01-01 /var/lib/dpkg/available: ) > > Package: tgif > > Priority: optional > > Section: non-free/graphics > > Installed-Size: 2376 > > Maintainer: Adrian Bridgett <bridgett@debian.org> > > Architecture: i386 > > Version: 1:4.1.42-2 Same seems to hold for frotz, BTW. So this could be a debian bug or the "available" database on Knoppix is not as good as it could be. > Again, I find this way of distinguishing between "free" and "non-free" > quite irritating. > How would you qualify a program that has components > which are illegal in Germany (DeCSS) or patented/proprietary (divX codecs), > but the program author, who lives in a country with different laws, > states that it is put under the GPL because "it should be"? > There are a lot of programs which state that they are GPL-licensed, but > I won't include them because I do see legal problems. Questions you should put to the legal mailinglists, e.g. there is http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/ . Please note that nobody said that the the GNU GPL is not a wonder weapon which will misteriously solve all problems. The struggle for freedom is a continuous one. > I'm trying to decide to the best of my knowledge which programs and > packages are good for inclusion, and which may cause problems concerning > redistribution and usage in different countries. Just looking into > an arbitrary table that says "this is free" and "this is non-free", > created by a set of policy writers who happen to share an opinion about what > SHOULD be free and what SHOULD not be, does NOT seem sufficient and > careful to me. No policy statement or database-of-free-programs can > replace your own thinking and research. From the previous discussion you showed that you have your own personal understanding of "free". It is different from the common understanding shared by many people in the Free Software movement and even in the Open Source movement. In trying to completely free Knoppix we (Intevation) based our inital package removal list on the research of the Debian group, because this is a group sharing the common definition of Free Software. If we find flaws in the work, we will help to correct them. Obviously the dpkg command in the current Knoppix shows frotz and tgif as being in non-free section. As packages are not in these sections anymore according to packages.debian.org I assume that we discovered a (technical) Knoppix bug. Did you update the available database for dpkg after apt-get update? Bernhard ps: Please send by a copy of relevant replies. I'm not on the list.
Attachment:
pgp_7FjnByLcD.pgp
Description: PGP signature