Re: The "Free" vs. "Non-Free" issue

[Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>]

On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 11:51:15AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 10:33:51AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > 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.
> 
> [...]
> 
> > 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.
> 
> You don't want to look yourself for free replacements for your *own*
> needs, but propose that "we [...] help orient people to free
> alternatives"? Without volunteers, this will not work.

Yeah sure, but a package in debian/non-free is a nice way to conduct
such business. There is the BTS to communicate with users, and a
legitimacy when speaking to upstream that you don't get from a random
package on a random apt source.

Also, notice that i am prefectly happy with the status quo, and that it
is the people who are wanting to remove non-free who i challenge to take
this actions. By putting their actions were their mouth is, and to
contribute to freeing or replacing non-free software actively, instead
of this bullying of their fellow debian devels.

Friendly,

Sven Luther