many ppl have been using the word2x reader as an example of something that is useless without nonfree software, and as i don't use it i'd like to ask a question: is there any free word-format writer around (doesn't have to be totally functional in that every possible word document can be written by it, but something that would convert, say, text and maybe a small subset of latex to a format that word2x can read)?
if yes, then of course word2x is not at all a valid example, because there is a free replacement for ms word. if no, then imho yes, word2x does not belong in main because it does not make the world more free -- in fact it encourages people to send you word 2.x documents, whereas if you refused to run word2x they might think twice and wend you something else like html or tex or (horrors) plain ascii or whatever free format that serves their purposes. this does not make word2x a bad program by any means; it's useful if you don't want to contaminate yourself with non-free software but still want to make life easier for the poor deluded souls who think nonfree software is ok for them. rms would tell you, i think, that word2x is bad because it does just that. he would want to see word2x in contrib because using word2x implies and encourages the use of word. by the same token, while there's no real way to use tik w/o using aol's server (and please, be reasonable... i know i could technically bash out a word 2.x document with a binary editor and a copy of the word2x source and yet nobody's suggested that that's the reason word2x is in main, and it's not valid), using tik pretty much implies using the aol server. that in turn makes it ok for people to use aolim because they know they can still talk to their linux-using friends, and not even realize they're being tricked into using a proprietary service. putting tik in contrib by contrast will still allow anybody who really wants to use this proprietary protocol to use it without worrying about contamination of their machine (because they know that contrib consists of free software that would be in main but for either a policy violation (tho to be honest i've never seen anything put in contrib for that) or some non-free dependency, and they'll know that the dependency isn't going to pollute their machine because no non-free packages get inmstalled), but will give them a big reminder "hey, this is still a non-free service, even though this part of it is free". manoj among others argues that putting things in contrib for this reason is damaging the free software effort by making the authors of free clients for proprietary protocols feel their efforts weren't good enough, discouraging them from going further. for this reason i suggest (but do not propose because i'm not a developer) that the definition of contrib be altered to: "contrib contains packages that would go in main except for the fact that they depend on a piece of non-free software to be useful for their major intended purpose. These packages are officially supported by Debian, and must comply with policy and the DFSG." or something similar. basically, to make contrib a part of debian but not part of the main distribution. i think main should only contain things that can be used fully and effectively with only other things in main (even on other machines!), which differs from the current policy in the same way that a "self-sufficient" farming commune differs from biosphere ii. --phouchg "For a price I'd do about anything, except pull the trigger: for that I'd need a pretty good cause" -- Queensryche, "Revolution Calling" PGP 5.0 key (0xE024447449) at http://cif.rochester.edu/~jpt/pubkey.txt
