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

Re: Non-Free proposal -- yet another draft

On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 08:23:57AM -0600, Raul Miller wrote:
> However, I received some criticism -- perhaps valid -- that "the
> Debian system" was itself too ambiguous to stand by itself.

What I don't understand is the idea that the phrase Debian is ambiguous.
"Debian will remain 100% free."  What is wrong with this phrase?  Remove
terms such as "software", "main", "distribution", and "system" and we
are left with Debian, as a whole, which will remain free as in libre'.
Doesn't that say exactly what we want?  Non-free is not part of Debian.
This idea is stated already in clauses 1 and 5.  How is this not clear?

> Also, since I needed an extra sentence to associate that with main, it
> seemed simpler to just use "Debian Main" as the noun phrase.

"Debian Main" is certainly Debian-specific terminology, but unnecessary
if you read the Social contract, even as it stands today.  Further
clarification is unnecessary.  I think this is why people are so
confused by your driving need to elaborate.

I think what you're really looking to create here is a Debian glossary
or dictionary.  Perhaps we should create a dict file and distribute it
with dictd. ;-)

Chad Walstrom <chewie@wookimus.net>                 | a.k.a. ^chewie
http://www.wookimus.net/                            | s.k.a. gunnarr

Reply to: