Scott James Remnant (![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} keybuk) wrote,@ 2004-03-15 15:01:00 |
|
My non-free vote
I have also voted to keep non-free in the current GR, however I think my reasons are different from any publically stated ones so far.
If we used non-free to simply store software that did not meet the DFSG, then I would have no problem with allowing it to be separated further from Debian and perhaps maintained by non-free.org or a similar organisation.
But it's not, there is software in non-free that has a DFSG-free licence and by all rights should be distributable in main. The reason the software has been placed in non-free is that it is restricted by the US's patent laws or similar Simply excluding software from Debian because there are legal problems in one country is, in my mind, ridiculous.
So my (primary, anyway) reason for keeping non-free is that it isn't just used to hold DFSG non-free software.
I have also voted to keep non-free in the current GR, however I think my reasons are different from any publically stated ones so far.
If we used non-free to simply store software that did not meet the DFSG, then I would have no problem with allowing it to be separated further from Debian and perhaps maintained by non-free.org or a similar organisation.
But it's not, there is software in non-free that has a DFSG-free licence and by all rights should be distributable in main. The reason the software has been placed in non-free is that it is restricted by the US's patent laws or similar Simply excluding software from Debian because there are legal problems in one country is, in my mind, ridiculous.
So my (primary, anyway) reason for keeping non-free is that it isn't just used to hold DFSG non-free software.
