sdc:
>
> My beginner question is, why doesn't Debian remove the proprietary software
> hosted on it's servers?
Because Debian currently thinks keeping proprietary packages serves
their users better than removing the "offending" packages. Officially,
proprietary packages aren't part of Debian anyway because they do not
enter main, only contrib or non-free. After installation, the user has
to explicitly add contrib and non-free to her sources.list in order to
install proprietary software.
One could argue (which I suppose the FSF is doing) that the distinction
between main and the rest is hypocritical, since Debian still
distributes contrib and non-free. From my POV, Debian's current way to
handle this issue is in fact serving their users best. (DFSG-)Free
Software by default, but every user may choose her own lovel of
"unfreeness".
> Don't they want to follow the FSF word?
In short: no. Debian follows the DFSG, the FSF follows its own rules.
Although both parties have quite a lot in common wrt Free Software,
Debian and the FSF have a long history of disagreement about "smaller"
issues. To me, it's basically a "potato / potahto" issue. ;-)
J.
--
I frequently find myself at the top of the stairs with absolutely
nothing happening in my brain.
[Agree] [Disagree]
<http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature