[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 10:06:23AM -0600, Chad C. Walstrom wrote:
> 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?  

If you qualify it as "The Debian Distribution", nothing. If you qualify
it as "The Debian Project", the statement's wrong. Either interpretation
is reasonable and makes sense, but if one of the interpretations is
wrong, then it's daft to leave the ambiguity there if you're going to
change anything.

> Remove
> terms such as "software", "main", "distribution", and "system" and we
> are left with Debian, as a whole, 

Which many would assume includes the pool/non-free directory that we
distribute from our ftp site.


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

             Linux.conf.au 2004 -- Because we could.
           http://conf.linux.org.au/ -- Jan 12-17, 2004

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: