On 19-May-01, 23:03 (CDT), John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 19 May 2001, Steve Greenland wrote: > >2a. It basically confirms that we think these patents are valid[1], and > >thus does not "stay true to our ideals". > > It can be worded that Debian disagrees strongly with the idea of patented > software, but pragmatically is providing it because of a percieved > utility. Sort of like RMS's "non-free" question in base, except a bit > longer and more preachy :)
Yeah, but we don't ship non-free stuff in main. We could just as well add a similar click though mechanism for non-free stuff as well: "The license for this software prohibits x, y, and z. If you swear you won't do any of those things, it's just as good a free software". Steve -- Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read every list I post to.)
