Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 20:09 +0200, Luk Claes wrote: >>> Either Social Contract section one and the DFSG prohibit the >>> distribution of a non-free blob in the release, or they do not. >> This 'in the release' is bogus, I guess you mean in 'main'? > > Debian is only free software. Non-free is distributed by Debian, but it > is not part of Debian. By "in the release" I mean the released versions > of Debian (which includes only main and optional).
We don't have a component called optional, nor do we only distribute our releases. >>> If they prohibit it, then it is an override to distribute >>> notwithstanding the prohibition. >>> >>> If they do not prohibit it, then no resolution is necessary. >>> >>> You seem to say an inconsistent thing: that they do prohibit it, and we >>> can avoid that prohibition by calling it a "practical consensus" instead >>> of an "override". Surely, however, it is the effect that matters, and >>> not the label you give it. >> Well that's the thing with goals, they are not strict rules, but we do >> try to reach them (though not at all cost) ... > > Perhaps you should propose an amendment to our Social Contract, which > speaks not of goals and aims, but of promises. Indeed, the point behind > the language of *contract* is that these are not merely goals, but firm > promises. You presumably would support an amendment to section one of > the social contract, changing it from a promise into a statement of a > goal. But such an amendment has not yet been passed, and your clear > declaration that you are not willing abide by the social contract as > written is troubling. It's already included in there: Debian will remain 100% free. As we're only improving, I don't see how it's not a goal as we were never 100% free, we are not 100% free and probably will never be 100% free. Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
