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

Re: General Resolution. Copied and Pasted Message from Developers Archive

Hear. Hear. I second that emotion.


Antonio Rodriguez wrote:
> The following is a message that I grabbed from the archives of
> developers' list, the ones with the power of vote about this or any
> other resolution. There are ideas here that are worth reading, so I
> decided to post it. Since it is in public domain, I hope Manoj doesn't
> mind.
> Antonio.
> %%%%%%%%%%% *************************************************
> %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%*******************************************
> %%%%%%%%%%% *************************************************
> Hi,
>         So far, we have always packages ``All the packages fit to
>  package''. The only criteria has been that we be legally allowed to
>  package software, and that some one finds it useful enough to spend
>  the effort packaging it. Indeed, when we could not distribute the
>  binaries, we created sourece only packages, or installer packages.
>         It was, IMHO, a judicious mix of free software evengelism, and
>  one of creating the *BEST* distribution, with all the useful
>  software we could package. I could almost always find any software
>  available out there already packaged for debian. We were the
>  inclusive distribution, and we showed our comitment to free software
>  by only bundling free software on our CD's, and our commitment to
>  useful distribution and our social contract by packaging and
>  supporting the other software that did not meet our guidelines but
>  was useful to our users.
>         I like the fact we can cater to people who like free software
>  (never put non-free in your apt sources), as well as to people who
>  just want a useful distribution -- and we can, gently, try to win
>  them over to free alternatives wehre such exist. We offer a choice,
>  we do not impose. We evangelize, we do not force.
>         Those who think this does not help Debian obviously have not
>  really thought it through.
>         This GR is disturbin. It throws away the promises made in the
>  social contract. It is exclusionary. It reduces the utility of Debian
>  to a number of users, and thus would marginalize us into a non
>  entity. And it makes us committed to the free distribution, as
>  opposed to the best free distribution.
>         I am not convinced that this is a good idea.
>         manoj
> --
>  As I was passing Project MAC, I met a Quux with seven hacks. Every
>  hack had seven bugs; Every bug had seven manifestations; Every
>  manifestation had seven symptoms. Symptoms, manifestations, bugs, and
>  hacks, How many losses at Project MAC?
> Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>
> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
> 1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
> 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: