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

Re: General Resolution: Removing non-free

This is completely true. Thank you for wording your stance so well.  I
would like everyone to take a quick look at the list of packages that are
in non-free. Here is a list of some that I use (in addition to the ones
mentioned by Andrew): mysql, quake2, libqt, pine, prime-net, mpeg123,

There are more but these are just a few. I know there are others out there
that use this software or it would not be part of the archive. I feel that
by including such basic non-free software in debian we continue to provide
complete distribution and fulfill on the social contract.

I too would be forced to use another dist if the non-free software was no
longer maintained by debian. I like many other people have put a lot of
work into getting linux (debian) accepted in my workplace. It would make
that task even harder if more time was spent compiling from scratch,
keeping up with bugs, and/or searching through 3rd party deb repositories
to install "non-free" software.

Please do not allow this resolution to pass.


On Thu, 8 Jun 2000, Andrew Sullivan wrote:

> Hello,
> I am not a Debian developer, so I have no rights in the any formal matters
> relating to how Debian governs itself.  In earlier versions of
> representative democracy, those without a vote were supposed to try to
> convince those who _could_ vote of their (the non-voters') position.  So,
> here goes; sorry it's so long:
> Removing non-free would be contrary to section (4) of the Social Contract:
> 	4.Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software 
>     	We will be guided by the needs of our users and the free-software
> 	community. We will place their interests first in our priorities.
> I'm a user of Debian, and removing non-free would be contrary to my needs
> (and those like me).  I'll explain.
> First, there are some programs in non-free that I use.  I need acroread
> because some .pdf docs that come to me can't currently be read properly by
> gv or xpdf.  I need libforms because I can't just tell all the Windows users
> around here to use LaTeX natively.  I certainly need netscape, as I need to
> be able to log problems with our library automation system vendor over the
> Web (and mozilla, w3m, lynx, what-have-you, won't do it).  
> Now, one might say, "compile or install the programs yourself." That is well
> and good, but unless I do the Debianizing, those programs are not really
> part of the system.  Upgrades won't be handled nicely.  The updating of
> /etc/alternatives/ will not happen without a lot of intervention.  And I
> don't get paid to Debianize packages.

Reply to: