Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mar 12/08/2003 à 20:47, Sergey V. Spiridonov a écrit :
It is wrong to pick up *some* inconveniences (and even negative aspects)
and call the license non-free. Correct way is to sum up all pros and
cons for the majority of people on the long terms.
I'm asking again: where do you set the limit?
Let's imagine infinite scale with absolute freedom(liberty) on one side
and absolute non-freedom on another. The border between free and
non-free will be at 0.
[snip]
I still wonder why people with the same ardour and consistency do not
speak about distribution of software in the non-free section? Why Debian
distributes non-free?
Because there are valuable non-free software. Such as the FSF manuals.
Do, you think that Debian will lost its value without non-free software?
If it's COOL, it's good enough for Debian? ;)
--
Best regards, Sergey Spiridonov
