Raul Miller wrote:
> On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 05:19:40PM +0200, Tore Anderson wrote:
> > For Debian to be "100% Free Software", it first must be "100% Software",
> > right?
> > I'm entirely willing to be educated where I'm wrong.
> If Debian is 100% software, does that mean developers can't be a part of
> Debian? What about mirror servers? What about mailing lists? What about
> passwords? What about licenses? What about printed materials? etc.
> Are these not parts of Debian? Are they 100% software?
> One issue here is that "Debian" is an adjective, and you have to dub
> in the noun. If that noun is "Software", you get a different meaning
> than if that noun is "Copyrighted Works". As it happens, the updated
> social contract uses the noun "System" -- a somewhat ambiguous noun,
> but to some degree that ambiguity is good because it lets us branch out
> into new things (new distributions for new architectures, most likely).
Except that you are then ignoring the clarifying text in the Social
Contract, which states:
We promise to keep the Debian GNU/Linux Distribution entirely free