[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

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?



Reply to: