Hey! Why does everybody love flaming so much? [was: `pure']
[I think my mail entitled `pure' got lost in the shuffle. Otherwise,
why has nobody commented on it? I think it's the way to end the flame
war. Here it is again:]
>>>>> Branden Robinson writes:
BR> Anyway, my suggestion (which wasn't even a policy proposal,
BR> you'll note) is withdrawn.
I haven't said anything up to now because I thought you and James have
been doing a good job of explaining your suggestion. Please don't
withdraw it now.
Allow me to make another attempt at explaining your suggestion, this
time using different words that I think everybody will understand:
Proprietary protocols are a problem. Let's create a new distribution
to set apart the packages that can work just as well (or better) when
connected to a network that uses only free software (say an intranet
that runs only Debian GNU `main').
Free ICQ clients fail this requirement, because on such a network,
there wouldn't be any servers, so it would be silly to claim that they
work ``just as well''.
distribution goodness/freedom rating
------------ -----------------------
pure 100.0% (entirely standalone)
main 99.7% (talks to the enemy)
contrib 50.0% (breeds with the enemy)
non-free 0.1% (hell, at least it's *software*)
Maybe a better name for `pure' would be `holy', which simply means
`set apart.' ;)
Comments?
--
Gordon Matzigkeit <gord@fig.org> //\ I'm a FIG (http://www.fig.org/)
Committed to freedom and diversity \// I use GNU (http://www.gnu.org/)
Reply to: