On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 03:12:07PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > 3. Debian does not go quite as far as Stallman would go in such areas as > removing drivers and binary blobs from the kernel, removing trademarked > images, and some similar issues. (Amusingly, Debian also goes much > farther than Stallman would go in ensuring that all the documentation > in Debian is free; Stallman and the FSF distribute and maintain > non-free documentation for some of their free software by Debian's > definitions.)
This is a little misleading. Debian holds a different position on what freedom means in respect to software documentation. To claim that this makes Debian more free presumes agreement with that position. > but I also think it's possible to overstate the effect of minor differences > and work that's not yet happened and miss the big picture. Debian and the > FSF, apart from the documentation freeness issue, agree in 99% of the cases. Agreed. From my understanding, the reason the FSF/GNU does not recommend Debian because doing so would be seen as an implicit endorsement of the non-free software which is an understandable position to take. -- Noah Slater <http://bytesexual.org/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
