Re: A rebuttal (was: Re: Formal CFV: General Resolution to Abolish Non-Free)
On Sat, Jun 10, 2000 at 03:47:12AM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:
> This is a valid point and regardless of the outcome of this resolution I
> am almost insistant that we should also resolve to make the Social
> Contract and DFSG require a 3:1 vote to alter, just like the constitution
> on the grounds that they are just as fundamental (if not moreso) to the
> project and should not be tampered with lightly.
I agree.
Actually, I'm tempted to push for making the Social Contract and DFSG
require a 4:1 vote to alter.
And, once that's done, I'd be happy to vote in favor of this change in
the social contract.
[I think we should work at supporting a bigger variety of non-free
software, which means getting it off our plate and onto the plates of
others. The way things are now, we're standardizing on certain kinds
of non-free software, and -- much as I might like using some of that
software -- I think that's a mistake.]
[[I'd also recommend that the maintainers of non-free software put
together some sort of non-debian mirror archive to distribute their
packages.]]
[[[One final thing: I don't think we can prevent mirror operators from
hosting both kinds of software. But I don't think there should be any
kind of consistent link from the free to the non-free stuff. Such a
link encourages the wrong kind of standardization, in my opinion.]]]
--
Raul
Reply to: