Re: weekly policy summary
Hi,
>>"DGMS" == Davide G M Salvetti <salve@debian.org> writes:
DGMS> ***** MS => Manoj Srivastava
DGMS> It is controversial indeed, does this also mean we can't try and have
DGMS> it decided?
Proabably this is not the right forum for that. The policy
process is a light weight process meant for changing policy on issues
where we havce a near consensus. This does not seem to be the case
here. You would be better served in the -devel list.
DGMS> I think we should focus on building a free OS.
That we do. Mentioning software does not take much focus,
IMHO.
DGMS> If other projects or companies want to use it to build
DGMS> something mixed (non-free software on top of our free OS),
DGMS> that's fine. But our stated aim is precisely to build a
DGMS> completely free OS;
Not completely. You are missing half the picture: our stated
goal is our users and completely free OS. The former requires a
compromise in the latter.
DGMS> so, while some of us engage themselves providing our users
DGMS> non-free package ---
It is not as if this were not in our charter.
DGMS> which is also a good thing, if people are willing to do it ---
DGMS> Debian (i.e., main) should stand by itself, without references
DGMS> to external non-free software. At least, this is our goal, I
DGMS> believe.
I think that is not our goal. No dependencies, yes. No
refences, no.
DGMS> I welcome lesser extremist position to have some discussion, then we
DGMS> could go ahead and propose something that accommodates as many of us as
DGMS> possible while preserving the spirit of our project.
DGMS> I think this is a good forum for this discussion --- last time we
DGMS> tried it on debian-devel we could not reach a consensus due to some
DGMS> flames, maybe here we could try and be cooler. :-)
I doubt it. And, as I said, anything this controversial can't
be decided here anyway -- this is not a forum where people can do end
runs around -devel.
MS> We have to strike a balance between the good to the community
MS> done by freeing software, and catering to the needs of our users
MS> by providing a system that is the most capable out there, and
MS> recognozing that some of our users do use software that does not
MS> meet our guidelines. I think allowing suggestions in fee software
MS> is condusive to those goal, and totally in line with those
MS> sentiments.
DGMS> It's a good think that some of us are willing to help our users
DGMS> providing non-free packages, but this should not affect the main
DGMS> Debian goal in any way,
I am afraid this is indeed part of the main Debian goal.
DGMS> which I feel is not the present situation. Beside, why don't
DGMS> we leave this catering to some external body?
Because that is _our_ goal too. (Have you actually read the
social contract? )
MS> Since we do recognize that some users have to sue software that
MS> may be non free, and we have committed to support our users who
MS> develop and run non-free software on Debian, we can do no less.
DGMS> Support is a key word indeed. We should just support, not
DGMS> encourage, nor have our project (i.e., Debian, or what we
DGMS> sometimes call `main') directly interwoven with something that
DGMS> is not a part of it, and could never become it for our very
DGMS> choice.
I think it is more important telling our users that there is
functionality they can gain even though the software providing it
does not meet our guidelines. I still recommend Photoshop and Word to
people for whom I think it is a better solution.
I prefer free software. I think well enough about it not to
think that censorship is the only way to make our point. And, pardon
me, your approach does smack of censorship.
If they do not know about nasty, eveil non-free software,
maybe they won't use it. Pah. I am a realist: there are some things
proprietary software does better. The solution is to have people who
are willing work on creating fee replacements, not by denying choices
to our users.
manoj
--
Troubles are like babies; they only grow by nursing.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
Reply to: