Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> wrote:
> madduck@debian.org wrote:
>
> >Why should firmware go to non-free, it's not evaluated on the CPU
> >that runs Debian.
>
> Because the policy revisionists changed the DFSG to make it apply to
> data as well.
Man, talk about inflammatory. I know I shouldn't, but I can't resist...
1) What makes you think that a program isn't a program just because it's
run by a different piece of hardware? "Oh, *that* software isn't
software, it's *data*, it doesn't run on an x86!"
2) The point is moot, since the original authors of the DFSG and
earliest members of Debian have fairly clearly indicated that they
intended *everything* in main to be DFSG-free whether *you* consider it
software or not.
3) The DFSG means whatever the Project collectively says it means. The
(super)majority of the members who cared to vote already clarified what
they believe is the meaning of the DFSG (even if they backed down on
their ideals a few weeks later).
I'm sure I'm not saying anything that hasn't already been said on
-legal a few hundred times at least.
IHBT. IHL.
--
Sam "Eddie" Couter | mailto:sam@couter.dropbear.id.au
Debian Developer | mailto:eddie@debian.org
| jabber:sam@teknohaus.dyndns.org
OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature