Re: FSF not considering Debian as Free (Re: Debian and non-free)
Filipus Klutiero wrote:
I could help to set-up the infrastructure and providing
the non-free.org domain, but I don't think I have enough
infrastructure to handle the machines.
I'm afraid you'd be wasting your time. I don't think the problem is the
domain name hosting non-free. Richard Stallman wrote:
;-) I've no problem for wasting few time and few money.
Thus, the debian.org site and the software in it should not refer to the
existence of non-free.org in such a way as to suggest getting non-free
software from there.
I tried for years to convince Debian to do this, but I did not succeed.
Translated to the current way things are done, this means that according
to Richard, the Debian website or Debian refer to the existence of the
non-free component in a way that suggests getting non-free software from
there.
I'm very curious what part of the website or Debian would be doing this
for years, but I guess someone could ask Richard.
IMHO, if we create the non-free.org, it should help Debian to better
manage the different queues and "policies".
Endorsement of FSF is good, but not so important.
Anyway:
- I prefer the freedom to choice the software (anyway free software
is better)
- without non-free software (non-free printer driver), do you think
RMS would have created FSF, GNU and GPL?
So I want non-free.org as a method to push writing/improving
free alternatives (or forcing protocol designed to open protocols,
but this is more difficult).
ciao
cate
Reply to: