Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I hope Debian won't adopt your views, but if it does, it won't be the > first disagreement between Debian and the FSF. Debian wrote its own > definition of free software which is different from ours. We also > disagree about Debian's practice of distributing and recommending > non-free software.
I would point out that the FSF has rewritten its views as well. For example, I protested that the FSF's acceptance of invariant sections contradicted its own reasing in the "why free manuals are important" document; the result was that the FSF changed the document. Debian insists that all which it distributes be free, under a single definition which does not require asking whether a given bit of text is "technical" or "political". Can you help us find a suitable definition for that?
