Hi, I would like to propose changes "s/non-free/semi-free/g" for the social contract after sarge release together with smooth archive directory reorganization "s/non-free/semi-free/g" to remove "non-free" from Debian. Here is my rationale: Whereas in the previous discussion on this "removal of non-free", the proponents of this agenda seem to be most offended by the existence of archive name "non-free" than the contents in them. Some proponents of this agenda even proposed the expansion (or loosening) of DSFG as an option in order to gain wider support for their proposal. Whereas the opponent of this agenda worried about practical impacts to the users and developers by the "removal of non-free" and wanted to keep the status quo. The above proposed middle-ground scenario of the expansion of of DSFG was strongly rejected by some of the opponent of this agenda since the dilution of the meaning of Free has serious negative implication and causes confusion in much deeper level. During discussion, Craig Sanders pointed out most of the "non-free" are practically "semi-free" in FSF definition. I think this is very interesting point. I do understand the negative feeling of carrying archive called "non-free" in Debian, the Free Software Organization. At the same time, I understand the practical benefits of the continuation of archive contents now called "non-free". In light of above understandings, let me seek "removal of non-free" with much more amicable context in which the practical function of our archive as a whole is maintained. This can be achieved by the creation of "semi-free" with yet-to-be-determined(*) clear guideline. Right now, we only have implicit guideline for "non-free". After all, "semi-free" softwares are better than proprietary softwares and calling them "non-free" may not serve our goals better. I do understand this is far from what the proponents of this agenda are seeking but this may be a good middle ground for the both sides. Regards, Osamu
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature