On Thu, May 06, 1999 at 01:09:10AM -0700, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote: > <comment> > I guess `contrib' or `non-free' is no big deal to a student or > hobbyist, but to a professional, it is, since that means you might > have to pay someone for a licence if you base your product on that > `non-free' library or whatever. > </comment>
Indeed. And as people make out contrib to be an evil thing (software
that tries to imitate software which is free but isn't really) as it is,
people such as RMS consistantly "encourage" (FSVO) a main-only
distribution, etc, etc, etc... This change is not something to take
lightly.
Of course my opinion has been stated a number of times: I don't believe
we should change it at all. We would be doing harm to free software
which is NOT encumbered by non-free software as are the packages
currently in contrib. So it is a change. And I wouldn't like the
change.
Of course for defending my position my character has been and likely will
continue to be ritually assasinated, but at this point I don't care. As
far as I am concerned, my position is the one that is morally correct.
My morals, not yours, not james', not manoj's, not anyone elses. Mine.
--
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Debian GNU/Linux developer
PGP: E8D68481E3A8BB77 8EE22996C9445FBE The Source Comes First!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Actually, the only distribution of Linux I've ever used that passed the
rootshell test out of the box (hit rootshell at the time the dist is
released and see if you can break the OS with scripts from there) is
Debian."
-- seen on the Linux security-audit mailing list
pgpAl80Otpkq1.pgp
Description: PGP signature
