Re: GR: Removal of non-free
On Mon, Dec 29, 2003 at 12:35:24PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> > This proposal seems to me to be intellectually dishonest, in the sense
> > that it makes worse the underlying conflicts it purports to solve.
On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 03:32:40PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I disagree. It is frank and blunt as to its intent and purpose. That
> people who actually want to remove non-free from our distribution have
> been manipulated into a corner through filibustering of all alternative
> means of bringing this issue to a vote is what it is dishonest.
I was talking about the "drop non-free, but don't amend the social
contract" proposal.
I get the idea you're talking about the "drop non-free and drop clause
5 of the social contract" proposal.
If so, we're talking past each other.
--
Raul
Reply to: