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

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 of non-free.

That's nice.

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

Reply to: