Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
The Social Contract says why: As a service to our users. You'll find a
lot of people here (hi, Branden!) would like to change that and get rid
Oh, yeah, and how exactly is the existence of non-free an argument to
put not-quite-free software in main?
As for me, removing of clearly non-free stuff should have higher
priority than moving FDL with disputable non-free status. It looks like
it is not.
Another point is, some people think non-free will stay with Debian
forever, so they do not raise their voice, because they think, they
still can get FDL documentation by pointing apt/sources.list to non-free.
Best regards, Sergey Spiridonov