>> > I find this state of affair rather sad and am disappointed by both
>> > Debian and the FSF for not finding a compromise. It ends up promoting
>> > the use of the non-free repository, which I think neither project wants.
> It's _not_ a Debian problem in one sense: it's the FSF's licence.
I doubt pointing fingers will help resolve this problem.
I think this problem should be easy to solve, all it takes is for both
Debian and the FSF to agree that this situation is simply unacceptable,
and then work together to find a solution.
Well the difference in views between the two is different at a fundamental level. So neither side accepts the others' view as fundamentally compatible on the main issue: what is free software, of any species?
> Or we could say "it's in non-free - not part of Debian - so we really
> don't care and if it breaks, well so what"
That's a cop out. Just as is FSF's position that it's Debian's problem.
It means both the FSF and Debian consider the current situation
as acceptable.
Again, I would phrase it as the expected outcome from a permanent difference in outlook. Ubuntu, for example, didn't really see Debian in that "Debian view" either. So they took it in their own direction, they do a great job in their way. They are allowed, that's the value of open-source licensing and free software. Ubuntu has taken flack from some people for their approach over time. Generally they ignore it.