2007/6/30, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> will have problems. However, note that I pointed, that whenever a closed > source bit is needed, it should be easy to install, but I think that we > should keep the closed source bits as far as the main distribution as > possible. Unless those closed bits are necessary to ensure certain functionality works out-of-the-box. The excuse of, "sorry, you're going to have a slow, crappy unaccelerated video in X until you install this other driver because our ideas and philosophy don't allow us to redistribute it" sounds really pathetic.
I find your lack of understanding of the practical consequences of software freedom pathetic too, but, I think that is irrelevant, this is not about what about we think of each other. This is about trying to find better solutions than just shipping closed source bits without encourage the software freedom that, for example, allows you to participate in decisions, like in this list.
Yes, it is hypothetical. It is also unproven.
You haven't proved that software freedom is not important for a project like Indiana either, so, instead of keep focusing on the "fuck idealism" thing, please, read carefully the suggestions to find a good compromise between keeping a core distribution fully opensource, and at the same time, making easy to get the closed source bit ondemand for users while they are using their system.
closed source bits on ubuntu, that were included with the same rationale as > you "users care about functionality", well, it happened that the most > successful distribution in the average joe target space, has been the most > controversial. Sometimes, normal users, do care. Yes, there was a lot of pressure. However, they did not do it, did they? And what was the reason? The users. They are the most important, not philosophy.
So, it is important. I would theorise that most of that pressure was merely because of
Ubuntu's association with Debian.
That is not proven, is just your gut feeling, so I can't see the point there. On the other hand, I don't see why Debian community members have a less important opinion than other people. There was also a lot of pressure to *not* give into the demands of not
including these bits from people that just wanted to use their system. It does go both ways...
Good point, that is why, it should just work, but "just work" and distributing the closed source in our system, are different things. Java just works on windows, when the browser detects that it's not installed, it automatically dowloads the JRE, but the JRE is not on the Windows XP cd, is it? Please try to get my point instead of accusing me of being a GNU idealist with long beard and all that stuff. -- Un saludo, Alberto Ruiz
_______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
