Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 11:07:31AM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote: >> No, a definition of "software" was never decided upon. The vote was >> about removing the word "software" in certain places from the DFSG, >> regardless of its definition. > > However, the S in DFSG means "software"; the SC was adjusted to say that > everything in Debian is judged by the DFSG, but the DFSG was not renamed > (for example, to mean "Debian Free Stuff Guidelines"). This means, to > me, that everything in Debian is Software.
I'd say it's just there by legacy. > It's a moot issue, anyway; any time the dictionary lawyers nitpick > "software", the real point is probably long lost, anyway ... :) Sure, how bout this: It seems to me that if you're saying everything in Debian is software, then your definition of software must be something equivalent to "information stored in a way that can be read by a machine". In that case, you'd certainly agree that the information stored on a punch card is software. And, if a punch card can store software, then certainly a name chiseled into the aforementioned granite could be considered software. After all, it's entirely conceivable a machine could be made to read it--it's not even all that different in concept from a punch card reader. That leads to the conclusion that anything in the universe could be considered software, since even sub-atomic particles store information that could be considered machine-readable. In other words, you've redefined software to mean simply "information". It's entirely inconsistent with the common usage of the term "software", but whatever. Has the real point been lost yet? :) What I'm trying to get at is that software is such a nebulous term that it really has no meaning, so it was just removed from the SC where it caused confusion. Just say Debian is 100% free, not that Debian is 100% free software, so we stop making ourselves look foolish trying to define what exactly "software" is. -- For every sprinkle I find, I shall kill you!