Re: Non-Constitutional Voting Procedure
On Thu, Sep 28, 2000 at 02:18:44PM -0500, Ean R . Schuessler wrote:
> To return to the crux of the biscuit, article 1 of the social contract
> says that commercial software will not be part of the "distribution",
> period. Five then says that we will offer commercial software via FTP,
> those concepts seem to be fundamentally at odds.
Actually, section 5 does NOT say that we will offer commercial software
via FTP.
As an example of what falls in the category covered by section 5,
which is not commercial: if we have some software that has a "you can
have the source, and you can give away the source or binaries for free,
but you can't distribute modified source without special permission"
license -- especially if they've given Debian special permission --
that would go in non-free.
Also, for this context, section 1 basically says that we won't make
anything in our distribution depend on stuff in non-free. [Which means
that stuff in contrib, which depends on stuff in non-free, should never
be a part of our official distribution -- it shouldn't be on our official
cdroms.]
Finally, if FTP really becomes obsolete, that doesn't contradict
section 5. However, FTP is no more obsolete than SMTP. [It doesn't
represent the majority of traffic on the internet, but people still use
it for quite a lot.]
--
Raul
Reply to: