On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 02:24:48PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote: > I do not believe Debian should be distributing such software. It > rightly fails the DFSG. For some users (for instance, a business) it is > actually less free than something without source (such as Netscape 4.7). > The no discrimination clause in DFSG is an important one. Debian must > be equally Free for all.
Why must it? We have an area that's free for all: it's called main. We have another area that contains stuff that's not free for all, but that is useful and that we're allowed to distribute. If you don't like the non-free stuff, then don't use it and don't maintain it. Why do you find that solution so unacceptable that you think Debian *must* do something else? Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. Linux.conf.au 2004 -- Because we can. http://conf.linux.org.au/ -- Jan 12-17, 2004
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature