> On Wed, May 26, 2004 at 08:26:33AM -0400, Walter Landry wrote:
> > The Social Contract defines the distribution as being entirely free
> > software. "copyrighted works distributable in digital form" don't
> > belong in the distribution.
> I'm pretty sure that the social contract is not asking us to avoid
> distribute copyrighted works distributable in digital form.
For anything not in the "distribution" (e.g. the web pages), I would
agree. However, I _do_ think that the social contract is saying that
anything in the "distribution" must be free software.
> > > Under the new social contract, he believes this distinction is
> > > disallowed, because our free software guidelines are declared to
> > > be the standard for judgment for all works in the debian system.
> > >
> > > In other words, before the release of the new social contract, there was
> > > ambiguity as to which definition of "software" was intended in the DFSG
> > > -- the release manager picked the most typical definition, and this was
> > > supported in his opinion by historical practice.
> > It was disallowed by the old social contract. There was a clear
> > consensus, and I'm not the only one saying that   .