Re: [Proposal] Updating the Social Contract
On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 10:22:08AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> | We acknowledge that some of our users require the use of programs
> | that don't conform to the Debian Free Software Guidelines. We
> | support interoperability standards such as "Linux System Base", and
> | will accept bug reports where our system violates those standards.
> = To make our system more attractive to people with mild dependencies
> = on non-free software, we have created "contrib" and "non-free" areas
> = in our internet archive. The software in these directories is not
> = needed by most people, and we do not guarantee all software in the
> = non-free area may be distributed in other ways. Thus, although
> = we're working to reduce people's dependence on non-free software,
> = we support users who are still dependent. Additionally, we will
> | work to provide free alternatives to non-free software so people who
> | use only free software can work with users of non-free software.
> I second this proposal.
> That said clarification of the last sentence would be nice, but maybe it can
> go in some rationale or something.
I'm planning on following Andrew M.A. Cater's suggestion, and will be
extracting the content of the lines marked above with = as a part of
the rationale for the proposal. [Those lines won't go into the social
contract except for the last two words of the last "=" line.]
Are you ok with that?
Is there any additional clarification you would expect?