olive wrote: > The social contract say also "We will never make the system require the > use of a non-free component". It is reasonable to think that the use of > Debian requires the GFDL documentation.
Even assuming the above "it is reasonable" is true[0], the following does not hold: > If Debian think there are > non-free they are breaking the social contract; could someone explain me > how this is not a break of the social contract. "...never make THE SYSTEM require the use of a non-free component." Even if your use of autoconf requires you to make use of non-free software, the system does not require the use of that software. The system != the user of the system [Otherwise, consider that the C language specification is by far not free software, and where that'd put us] [0] A proposition with which I disagree. Personally I've managed to use quite a bit of software without resort to the docs. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
