>>"Steve" == Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Steve> I'd be happy to hear clarifications from the author and
Steve> contemporaries, then; to be honest, my memory of Debian
Steve> history isn't good enough to even know who to approach. (The
Steve> debian-doc package is conspicuously lacking of the relevant
Steve> copyright information, btw. :)
Well, if y'all can trust my aging memory, this is my impression
of how things were.
From what I recall of that time, there was tension between the
pragmatists(Hi Alex) and the GPL proponents* (of which at that time, I
was one). The argument of the pragmatists was similar to what one
hears on lkml right now vis-a-vis BitKeeper -- it is stupid to chose
an inferior solution over a better one merely for licensing reasons,
mention was made of things being free enough (essentially all we have
in non-free is was deemed free enough), and the ultimate end goal was
to produce the best, most useful, distribution ever. Also, the
argument went that one needed to be pragmatic about software people
ran if one were not to be marginalized and made irrelevant; hence we
needed to support ``real software that people used''. The GPL people
were for essentially removing all non free software from Debian.
I don't think non software stuff even occurred to anyone at
the time, so I don't think the argument that the DFSG precludes
anything that is not software holds water (aside from the fact that
anything on a website or on a debian cd can arguably be called
software anyway).
The DFSG was a compromise: we said that only free software
shall be a part of debian (hurrays from the GPL proponents), whike
recognizing the needs for users to run software we did not feel were
licensed under a free license. [The next bit is my OPINION]. The core
of the philosophy was one of choice: we preferred free software, bit
we did not constrain or coerce people to it; we advocated free
software, but still provided help and support for users not yet
running only free software; the premise was that people would realize
on their own the virtues of free software, and as time went on, the
non-free stuff would wither on its own accord. The users came above
evangelizing free software.
The tenor of the project has changed. No one argues that we
need the non free stuff to survive anymore. The membership also seems
to have shifted towards a more radical^H^H^H^Henthusiastic support of
_only_ free software, and helping people use whatever they wish on
Debian, while providing them with free alternatives, seems to be on
the wane. I, for one, still believe in offering people alternatives
and choices, within Debian, and letting them choose.
I'm sure that people shall rise up and flame me resoundingly
for revisionist history, and set the record straight according to
their recollection ;-).
manoj
putting on absestos long johns
*This category includes the DFSG free licenses like BSD, X, Artistic,
as well
--
"But this one goes to eleven." Nigel Tufnel
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
