[Fsf-Debian] Hi :-) ... and vrms ?

[Bryan Quigley]

Obviously it is failing to be a perfect copy Virtual RMS, considering he
would certainly consider emacs documentation free.   Although in it's own
description, it does own that fact:

"In some cases, the opinions of Richard M. Stallman and the Debian project
have diverged since this program was originally written.  In such cases,
this
program follows the Debian Free Software Guidelines."

I find it to be oddly useful.  How much am I respecting my own freedom to
tinker with every part of my computer's software.  As long as nonfree and
contrib exist, I feel like it serves a purpose in Debian.  In downstream
distros,  it provides a check on how much proprietary software they are
pushing their users to.

~Bryan


On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Kim Tucker <kctucker at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> This is just a short note to let you know I have joined the list.
>
> I am just curious to know how things are going.
>
> Would it make sense to try to harmonise vrms with Guidelines for Free
> System Distributions?
> http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html
>
> Currently vrms fails:
>
> http://libreplanet.org/wiki/List_of_software_that_does_not_respect_the_Free_System_Distribution_Guidelines#vrms
>
> A comprehensive tool to check for non-free software in a Debian-based
> system and recommend alternatives would be really useful.
>
> Thanks
>
> Kim
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fsf-collab-discuss mailing list
> Fsf-collab-discuss at lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/fsf-collab-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/fsf-collab-discuss/attachments/20121017/828591ef/attachment.html>