On 2004-11-17, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-11-17 at 08:28 +0000, Juha Siltala wrote:
>> On 2004-11-16, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, 2004-11-16 at 22:50 +0000, Juha Siltala wrote:
>> >> On 2004-11-16, Rick Friedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> > Paul Johnson wrote:
>> >> >> But F-Prot sucks by default because it is nonfree. Check out clama=
>> >> > Hmmm... except F-Prot for Linux for the workstation is free for pers=
>> >> That's not free. They just don't charge you any money.
>> > Of course it is.
>> >
>> > $ dict free
>> > [snip]
>> > {Free cost}, freedom from charges or expenses. --South.
>> > [snip]
>> That's hardly what free/nonfree refers to in the context of Debian=20
>> software, and I'm sure you know that.
>
> Ask anyone on debian-legal if the difference between libre &=20
> money-free is relevant to Debian.
Exactly. The only problem is I fail to see any difference our opinions.
I'm saying F-Prot for personal use is not free. Someone says it's free
because it doesn't cost anything. I'm saying being gratis doesn't make
F-Prot free in ways that Debian uses the word. You're saying the same
thing. And here we are in the middle of an argument, which is kinda weird.
--
Juha Siltala
http://www.edu.helsinki.fi/activity/people/jsiltala/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
