Bas Wijnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Both theories are probably true, and the effects of course work against > each other. I'm very happy that Debian clearly separates main from the > rest, so I can easily use only free software with it. If other people > want to use non-free software, I am not going to stop them (although I > am advising them to stop ;-) ). The Social Contract doesn't really say > more than that: we must not obstruct other people when they want to work > with non-free software. As you apply for DM, you also accept to agree > with that, btw.
Right. However, I think there is a conflict between the first priority "Debian will remain 100% free" and the action of "We have created contrib and non-free areas in our archive for these works.". While the Debian operating system (i.e., main) is free software, the Debian project still endorse non-free software, as far as I can tell, and Debian is thus not a strictly free software project. It would help if the social contract made that clear by changing DFSG 1 into 'Debian the operating system will remain 100% free'. Right now it is easy to get the idea that Debian the project is 100% about free software. When considering to join the Debian project as a DD, I felt that this conflict was problematic. I still wish to help and improve the free parts of Debian though, and the DM way seemed appropriate for me. I may re-consider in the future, but right now the difference between DM and DD does not seem significant for me to bother with both the DD process and the ethical conflict. I understand that if I would apply as DD, I may have more influence to change the scriptures. However, as far as I can tell, I believe the chances of that happening are low. It seems more likely to me that one of the 100% free spin-off projects like gNewSense will succeed. If that happens, I could switch to them from Debian (which I've been using for close to 10 years) and my contributions would still be useful. > I'm not saying you should apply to become a DD. It's your choice if you > want that. But I think Debian has a very good way to deal with non-free > software: allow people who want to work on it to do what they want, > while making it easy to not see it at all. It allows supporters of both > theories to do things their way. Another way that would also allow both supporters to do things their way, and a way that seems more appropriate to me, would be to have one project for each theory. People who support only one theory can work on the project they prefer, and people who support both theories can work on both projects. What would be required to do that is to improve and package the Debian infrastructure, like the BTS, buildds tools, mirror infrastructure tools, etc. That is some work, but it seems like that work may be useful anyway. /Simon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
