On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 03:14:49PM +0200, Kari Pahula wrote: > A snapshot from http://www.debian.org/vote/2004/gr_non_free_tally.txt: > Option 1---->: Choice 1: Cease active support of non-free [3:1 majority needed] > / Option 2--->: Choice 2: Re-affirm support for non-free > |/ Option 3-->: Choice 3: Further Discussion > ||/ > V: 213 ajt Anthony Towns > > The rest of you: would you still vote like you did in 2004, if > the issue was brought up again? Yes. I think non-free is an excellent "slippery slope" to get people to make their software free -- once you start getting involved in the free software community, and you have the opportunity to enjoy working with a wide community of hackers and contributors, you want to get more involved. Non-free is one way of starting down that path. That it gives users an easy way of getting at software that doesn't meet the DFSG without losing the benefits of policy compliance is also pretty valuable, for what I presume are obvious reasons. Finally, as a perception issue, being focussed on freedom can make people consider you an extremist and decide you're not worth listening too; taking a non-absolutist view by providing non-free packages helps demonstrate that we're reasonable people rather than religious fanatics whose views can simply be dismissed out of hand. > Is having it hosted on Debian's infrastructure still worth it? IMO, yes. > Do you expect that there would be any changes regarding its > status during your term? I would like to see more well-known non-free software included into it; particularly things like VMWare's vmplayer. Cheers, aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature