Ray Percival wrote: > > On Dec 16, 2007, at 11:58 AM, David H. Lynch Jr. wrote: > >> Marco Peereboom wrote: >>> You can use OpenBSD to build a baby mulcher or a nookyoular weapon and >>> you have the choice to retain the source code. >>> >>> You can use the GPL to build a puppy blood drainer or a dirty bomb >>> provided you deliver the source code with it. >>> >> Agreed, but would you except either in ports ? >> The question is not what is possible, but what are you willing to >> endorse. >> >> The purpose of the extreme example is to point out that including >> something within >> ports has meaning. > > > Sure. Of course. A tool is just a tool. To not point at a given tool > just because it could be used for evil is fairly fucking arrogant. > > But software which OpenBSD uses and redistributes must be free to all > (be they people or companies), for any purpose they wish to use it, > including modification, use, peeing on, or even integration into baby > mulching machines or atomic bombs to be dropped on Australia. > Theo [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list, May 29, 2001 That's fine, it is a statement of values and principals, that is exactly what I was looking for - something that is conspicuously absent from the OpenBSD web site. If it is what OpenBSD beleives - have the balls to say so, rather than the watered down language on the website. The OpenBSD website expresses a clear value for code quality, and one of security.
It is also inconsistent with providing URL's to software that is not free to all. I do not care whether you use a different definition of freedom than the FSF/GNU/RMS. Whatever your definition of freedom is, if you do not apply it to the things you provide URL's for in ports, then you are saying that that freedom is not really all that important to you. If you really beleive in that stick to it, even with in URL's in ports. Tell RMS that OpenBSD will accept in ports only software that is freely redistributable, regardless, of what its purpose is. One of my problems with OpenBSD, is that the sense I get of what you mean by freedom is the freedom to do whatever I please, including reject your own values, when it is convenient. Further I think you are so hostile to the FSF/GPL/RMS that you would deliberately violate your own principles, to spite RMS.
