On Fri, 28 Feb 2014 20:21:13 +0100 Bálint Réczey <bal...@balintreczey.hu> wrote:
> Hi Solal, > > 2014-02-28 19:24 GMT+01:00 Solal Rastier <solal.rast...@me.com>: > > Le 28 févr. 2014 à 19:22, Octavio Alvarez <alvar...@alvarezp.ods.org> a > > écrit : > > > >> On 02/28/2014 09:29 AM, Solal Rastier wrote: > > > My mail client top-posting automtically. I don't compare Windows and > > Debian. Windows is proprietariest than Debian, but Debian isn't 100% free. > > Now, think about the utility of "contrib" and "nonfree". We must create > > free replacements to proprietary, not put proprietary in Debian. Additionally I would like to say that Debian is a software distribution, not a project for creating new software. So it seems like a little bit out of scope to write new software. So like Balint says when there are good replacements, they will be happily included. I want to note at this point that the FSF isn't the ultimate resource for deciding what Free Software is and what not. There are many (well, at least me) people who don't agree with the explanation why Debian isn't free software. You could even argue that it wouldn't be free NOT to include non-free software into the Debian archives. Because (so one could argue) it would take away your freedom (which is all the FSF is reasoning about) to install non-free software through apt-get. > You are enthusiasm is welcome. Your help in improving free > replacements would also be appreciated. > There are pages for people who would like to start contributing to > Debian, they may be interesting for you: > https://www.debian.org/intro/help > https://wiki.debian.org/how-can-i-help > > The more we improve Free Software, the sooner we can remove > non-free(/contrib) parts of Debian. > > Cheers, > Balint
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
