On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 11:29:21AM -0000, Dan Purgert wrote:
Ben Finney wrote:Byung-Hee HWANG <soyeomul@doraji.xyz> writes:My meant is that 100% rules/policy is not easy to keep for FSF-like Free Software by the definition.[snip] Do you believe “keep 100% rules/policy” is necessary for a person using free software? What does that mean?I think he means he doesn't see the "you must use free software" approach as the best for the general users. This is at odds (AFAICT) with Debian's stance on the matter.
Debian's stance isn't "you must use free software" but rather "we can only distribute software we are allowed to". Debian does not forbid people from installing software which they (the user) have permission to use but which they (Debian) does not have permission to distribute. The best-known example is Adobe's Flash Player. Debian does not have permission to distribute this. Users DO have permission to download and install it, though, so Debian provides a downloader/installer package which automates the user's actions.
This is where Debian differs from the "ideals" of the Free Software Foundation. If the FSF had their way, such tacit approval of Non-Free software would be banned. I'm surprised that Grub (A GNU program) deigns to load Windows :)
-- |_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947 |_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert |O|O|O|
-- For more information, please reread.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature