Re: General Resolution: Removing non-free
>>>>> "Marek" == Marek Habersack <email@example.com> writes:
Marek> No, Debian is obligated to provide *functional* software,
Marek> that's it. The software should be free, that's the ideal
Marek> and a goal of this distribution, but the project allows for
Marek> non-free software which has no *functionally equivalent*
Marek> free software.
I am curious, where do you get this idea? I have not read anything
like this in the Debian literature.
The only thing I have read that comes close to saying this is point
four of the Social Contract, which is the very thing we are debating!
So it seems rather circular to refer to it as authoritative.