On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 05:30:03PM -0400, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote: > Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Wed, 2004-08-25 at 15:25 -0400, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote: > > > >> Sure we can. I might convince you that they're in the wrong place -- > >> and certainly debian-legal is the right place for that discussion. Or > >> you might convince me that they are in the right place. Neither of > >> those is an axiomatic belief. > > > > No, I don't think debian-legal /is/ the right place. Debian-legal is the > > place to discuss whether a license is free or not based on Debian's > > ideas of freeness, not whether Debian's ideas of freeness are correct. > > There may not be a more appropriate place at present. That doesn't make > > the use of debian-legal appropriate. > > Do you actually have any authority to make that proclamation, or is it > just as much wishful thinking as my statement that this is an > appropriate place? > > > You believe that there are some languages that are inherently > > non-free? > > No, I believe some sourceless programs are inherently non-free. If > they're not practically modifiable, then they can't be free software.
Does this mean that a program written in C is only free if the user you give it to is fluent in C ? Or can get someone fluent in C to make modifications for him ? Friendly, Sven Luther
