MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...]
>> My understanding of RMS's position is that he would like Debian to >> follow something like the rule that the FSF has about not linking to >> any non-free software from their sites, [...] > > That rule is a myth. It most certainly is not. I can attest to that personally, having been involved in and followed multiple FSF projects for many years. It is an expectation for all GNU projects. > Their campaign sites like http://badvista.fsf.org and > http://www.defectivebydesign.org/ have links to and about non-free > software - with commentary, but still links. I would have thought that was fairly obviously not quite the same thing as what I was talking about. I didn't state the exact parameters of the rule in detail, and it's not as simple as just never mentioning the existence of any non-free software package, but I expected the audience here to be reasonably familiar already with what I was talking about. > I think it's counter-productive to spend so much time badmouthing the > competition, but I'd be happy to see a link from fsf.org to debian that > noted we have different views on some aspects of freedom. I'm not bad-mouthing the competition. As I already said, I'm an associate FSF member, and I'm involved in several GNU software projects. Please do not attribute spurious motives to me without understanding what I'm saying. > Anyway, does this thread count as debian.org mentioning non-free.org? > If so, we've lost already, actually. No, of course not. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
