Re: RFD: amendment of Debian Social Contract
Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> What you're saying above is that ideology should be *more important* than
> pragmatism, since what goes in the social contract is definitively more
> important than stuff that doesn't:
No, I'm saying that it can be viewed as different things. This has
nothing to do with the one thing being more important than the other.
>> It's a distinction
>> I'm not surprised that not everybody see but it is important to me.
>
> Mmm. You're very special.
No, I'm not. It might be a cultural issue but it is, for me, perfectly
sane to say:
1. This is what I believe.
2. This is how I make them true in the most optimal way.
Pragmatism might be fully absent from the first but essential in the
second.
> Just because supporting non-free software doesn't have any moral value
> for you, doesn't mean that's the same for everyone.
So what you're saying is that if something have any moral value for
any Debian Developer then it should be part of the social contract
(Ok, restricted to thing relevant for developing an operating system)?
No, the social contract is the common ground we're all agreing to and
not just random collection of what some of the developers believe in
and find moral value in.
--
Peter Makholm | Perhaps that late-night surfing is not such a
peter@makholm.net | waste of time after all: it is just the web
http://hacking.dk | dreaming
| -- Tim Berners-Lee
Reply to: