Re: General Resolution: Handling of the non-free section: proposedBallot
Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 02:37:34PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > It is not Debian's job to help you with everything in your life that
> > you want to volunteer for. Debian has a purpose, and I seek to
> > clarify what that purpose is.
>
> Its purpose is to create a first class free operating system, and
> support the users of that operating system. We currently do that by
> doing everything we can to support users needs; even if that means
> distributing non-free software. Those concepts are explained in both the
> social contract and the constitution, and aren't particularly ambiguous.
I'm a little unclear on how a "first class free operating system" can
be non-free. I guess that's the central problem here.
> You're seeking to _change_ how we go about that purpose, not clarify
> anything. There's nothing immoral in that, and in particular there's no
> need to pretend otherwise.
Sure, there is no confusion here that the proposal I'm arguing for
includes an amendment to the social contract. I am undecided about
whether that amendment is necessary to the other part of the proposal.
Thomas
Reply to: