Re: Results for General Resolution: Lenny and resolving DFSG violations
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 09:55:36PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-12-29 at 15:02 +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > I would personally prefer
> > for the project to have the freedom to decide those sorts of things
> > on a day-to-day basis through regular decision making [...]
> I would prefer this. But I am afraid of it, and so I would vote against
> it. I am afraid that there are folks in the project who really don't
> care if Debian is 100% free--even as a goal. I think that Ted Tso is
> even one of them.
Whatever his motives, I think Ted's demonstrably done more to further the
cause of free software than most developers, both by making Linux more
and more usable for over 15 years now, and for helping other developers
work together better, such as by organising the kernel summit.
I'm all for having a 100% free system, and then some, but if it comes
down to a choice between supporting absolute freeness without exception,
and working with folks like Ted, I'm more interested in the latter.
> In my opinion, developers who are unwilling to abide by the Social
> Contract in their Debian work should resign. But they don't, and this
> is what has me afraid.
Of course, the other side of that ist that we've never worried about
DDs who aren't willing to support non-free, which is also part of the
social contract.
Anyway, I'm already getting namechecked for discussing this too much
[0], so, well, whatever. See y'all again when squeeze gets held up.
Peace out,
aj
[0] http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/serendipity/index.php?/archives/148-When-firmware-is-not-software.html
Reply to: