[Fsf-Debian] The question behind the questions [was No response?]
bryan at katofiad.co.nz
Sun Aug 5 00:12:13 UTC 2012
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 08/05/2012 11:01 AM, Mason Loring Bliss wrote:
> I tried in my small way to pursue Debian's inclusion in the FSF
> free distributions list. [...] I've heard just enough of Bryan's
> sort of views to solidy my opinion. [...] Support for non-free
> software is going to get more people to use free software.
What was your "small way" of trying to get Debian on the FSF list? How
many nonfree packages did you actually remove from the distribution?
Am I right, at least in your case? For you, this about getting Debian
into the FSF free distribution list without actually removing or
stopping support for anything nonfree.
> I'm still struck by the image of overwrought zealots in an ivory
> tower throwing stones at the people building and maintaining the
> foundation of their tower.
Is denying the Debian distribution a listing on FSF actually throwing
stones? Being on that list is about actually being free, not
pretending to be free by doing a lot of work for free software and
distributing nonfree on the side. You said it yourself. You think
distributing nonfree software helps free software. Why then do you
need to try to label something free, when it obviously isn't?
> If there isn't a willingness to consider being flexible on both
> sides, then we might as well go back to Debian being hugely
> popular and the FSF promoting rebranding efforts like Trisquel and
Yes, that is my feeling exactly. We *shouldn't* be "flexable" on
freedom. If Debian wants to get on the free distribution list, Debian
developers need to get to work on actually making the distribution
free instead of trying to persuade the FSF to drop the first word in
its name, or change that word to "open."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Fsf-collab-discuss