Re: The "Free" vs. "Non-Free" issue
On Fri, Jan 02, 2004 at 09:14:30PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> On 2004-01-02 20:08:33 +0000 Raul Miller <moth@magenta.com> wrote:
>
> >Are you talking about
> >http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/debian-vote-200401/msg00001.html?
>
> Dunno. I'm not at my connected machine when writing this. If it is the
> list of Java packages, then yes.
>
> >Your 2:36PM followup to that message didn't really give any specifics
> >about why you thought some of those packages could go into main.
>
> When I last asked, the problem was not having a java in main. I think
> that problem has gone away, so I wonder why they are still there. It's
> not directly relevant to -vote now. Please reply off-list or
> elsewhere.
Ok, so then, please someone write a nice software ADSL library, so my
unicorn ADSL modem driver can go in main.
And let's remove all that bunch of non-free documentation that currently
is in main. After all, i see no reason why ocaml-doc (and ocaml-book for
that matter, which contains the whole html version of some oreilly ocaml
book) have to be no more supported by debian, while we have loads of
non-free documentation in main (and not even all of them covered by the
gnu documentation licence problems if i remember well).
And what was my last example, a yes, lha. I hear there are some free
versions of this one around. I would be happy to package it if this was
the case, please point me to alternatives, and we can remove lha from
non-free, no problem.
The reality is that removing non-free (or whatever you want to call it)
is just a demagogic issue, it would be far better to have some plan to
phase out non-free software from debian than to remove non-free. And
handle each case individually. Have the non-free software listed
somewhere, with the exact reason why they are non-free, and have some
way for people to contribute on getting either a free alternative or
working on freeing the software, some status report or such, in summary
a way to help each piece of non-free software be freed.
So, please, stop this demagogical non-sense that clutters our mailing
boxes, and start acting on a way to replace all the software in non-free
by free versions.
And i would support a way of removing non-free that is flexible. Let's
say that we say we provide infrastructure for distributing non-free, but
also to help orient people to free alternative, either as users or as
developers.
What do you think of that ? Would this not be a much more valuable goal
for Free/Open Software/Source people to obtain, than this lamentable
flamewar that only stops us from spending our valuable time doing real
work ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: