Just a minor nitpick on the point below; for the more general discussion I stand behind the opinion I've previously posted in this thread. On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 04:00:42PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > After all, if we could use and point to 3-4 CDNs that are advocating > Free Software, isn't it better to show that such core Internet > services can be run using Free Software? I don't think whether CDN offerings (and/or the companies behind them) are *advocating* Free Software or not is relevant. IMO it's neither relevant for this discussion, nor it's relevant in general to decide the kind of relationships Debian should have with companies. Basically all medium-to-big sized companies are split on how much they advocate Free Software. You invariably find company parts that are hard-core Free Software advocates, and other parts that don't care and turn a living by developing non-free software and services that deprive users of the software freedoms they are entitled to. For the specific case of CDN offerings to the Debian Project, the point---well, my point, I respect the fact that others disagree it's a problem---is whether we're going to force our user to receive the Free Software we're distributing via infrastructures built using non-free software. That problem would exist even if the companies behind those services were big Free Software advocates, which just happen to have a single service (the CDN) built using non-free software. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Former Debian Project Leader . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature