Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 08:45:11AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: > >>Christian Perrier wrote: >> >>>And isn't another "small cabal" of freeness junkies, who cannot accept >>>that it is actually possible to work with commercial vendors to assist >>>them in their way to free software, doing exactly the opposite by >>>playing words with legal issues ? >>> >> >>Please explain how this helping them on their way to free software. >>Don't get me wrong, I applaud their contributions to the open >>source/free software communities (NetBeans, OpenOffice, Gnome >>contributions, etc). However, I have a hard time understanding how >>Debian distributing Java, which, judging by all the debate, is still >>under questionable license terms, will help. In my opinion, a continued >>refusal to distribute it until it met the required criteria would be >>much better. As it stands, here is it appears: >> >>Sun has gained for Java: >> - "approval" or "validation" as "free enough" for all Linux distros >>(remember, Debian is seen as the most restrictive in this regard) > > > Debian has not accepted Java in main. Any user sufficiently proficient > with anything remotely Debian-related knows that. > > >> - a willing accomplice > > > I'd suggest anyone googling for "Debian Java" and stumbling on this > thread will think differently. > > >> - a demotivation to find more favorable licensing terms > > > Since the people who've made this happen have claimed they want to go on > with this, I question that. > > >>Debian has gained: >> - lots of people blogging about this whole mess > > > Wonderful, isn't it? > > >> - possible future legal problems (extent is still being sorted out) > > > By whom? A bunch of people with too much time on their hands. Is there > an actual lawyer involved? I don't think so. > > >> - something it already had (admins who really wanted Sun's Java could >>always go to java.sun.com and install it themselves or use java-package) > > > Well, see, *this* is not true. Sure, it's possible to install Java on a > Debian system; one can even turn a non-free binary java distribution > into a Debian package and install that by using java-package. However, > this is a far cry from > * Being able to install non-free Java on your Debian system, even if the > oldest Java binaries being distributed by the original authors are > more recent than the ones java-package is ready for > * Being able to just install non-free Java by running "apt-get install". > * Being able to upgrade to a newer (fixed) version of Java by just > running "apt-get upgrade" > > But you knew that already, I'm sure. >
All good points. However, I think that much of the "popular" press (in the sense of popular geek press) is not making the distinction between Debian proper and Debian non-free. Some have, but others have not. Headlines like "Debian distributes Sun Java" are not uncommon. Is it right? No. Is it happening? Yes. -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
