Bastian Blank <[email protected]> writes: > On Mon, Mar 02, 2026 at 05:54:44PM -0700, Soren Stoutner wrote: >> On Sunday, March 1, 2026 4:18:39 PM Mountain Standard Time Jonas Smedegaard >> wrote: >> > Do you also agree it is not useful to label a single Debian Pure Blend >> > more "Libre" that anything else? Because as I understand it, that is >> > the very point that Gunnar was making and that I tried to examplify. >> I would consider it fairly uncontroversial that a Debian blend that did not >> contain non-free-firmware would be more "Libre" than a version of Debian >> that >> does contain non-free-firmware. It’s in the name. “Non-free” means “Not >> Libre”. “Debian Libre” means “no non-free stuff". > > Actually no, we even had a GR about that. And within Debian we only > have "free" as term, so "libre" is undefined.
The GR did not change the DFSG's definion of what is "free". The GR added a reference to non-free-firmware in the "Works that do not meet our free software standards" section of the social contract. /Simon
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
