On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Buddha Buck wrote: > Just because there is a "free replacement" doesn't mean that we should > drop the non-free version . . . [b]ut as a user, I'm familiar with > Navigator . . . The ideal situation, IMO, would be to have a free counterpart for most non-free packages which is a clearly superior product (stability, reliability, features, speed, memory requirements, desktop integration, etc). It seems to me that Mozilla is _not_ the choice at this time; however, to quote Joey Hess: On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Joey Hess wrote: > However, I find konqueror (in kdebase) quite able already. It does > everything I've needed netscape to do, including ssl, cookie > management, java and javascript, and good page layout. Back to Buddha Buck's comments: > True, I'd not lose Navigator if non-free disappeared, but I'd lose the > BTS, I'd lose the painless install/updates, I'd potentially lose the > integration, etc. This is true, but unless you are the most fanatical of GNOME users, konqueror could very well be good enough to replace Netscape (however, I've not tried KDE's news and mail clients; they may or may not be as useful as Netscape's. YMMV). A better example than Netscape, I believe, is the variety of documentation available through non-free, such as doc-html-w3 and wdg-html-reference. How would one propose removing these from Debian without losing the benefits of having such packages available through the infrastructure? Considering the passionate posts encouraging the removal of non-free, I'd assume that these questions have been well thought through. Is it reasonable to have writers clean-room reconstruct documentation for Free use, when an alarmingly high number of packages in free include incomplete manpages, if they are included at all? What about spim? The first time I used apt-get was as a freshman CS student studying MIPS assembly. I had just installed Debian, and was trying to decide whether to keep it. After watching "apt-get install spim" do its magic, I was sold. Is there a project to replace spim with a Free alternative? To me (a mere user), Debian is about the quality of the installed system. I am no stranger to source installation and making local packages for non-packaged software; Debian steps in and allows us to share our efforts. Non-free may include material which is not DFSG compliant, but by downloading that .deb you're also getting to reuse Debian developer's time and knowledge of the Debian system regarding package creation. > If I am forced to switch to a free replacement because of a policy > decision . . . that's political blackmail. Additionally, if a developer is told that he is no longer allowed to share his time invested in packaging non-free software with others through use of the infrastructure, then the Debian project is trying to create artificial bias. Software freedom should NEVER be used as an excuse to lessen personal freedom. > Later, > Buddha > [1] . . . If Mozilla allowed me to do my online banking, I do at onlinebanking.nationalcity.com (128-bit encryption) with konquerer. > play the daily crossword puzzle at www.dictionary.com, I just tried it in konquerer - it works. > and a few other similar things, I'd go for it. I can't vouch for the JavaScript, for I haven't yet tried it (or possibly it's worked and I haven't noticed). Give kde a shot - I was fully prepared to hate it (I was disappointed with GNOME), but I am seriously impressed. If the Debian developers supporting the removal of non-free could explain how they would suggest solving problems of reduced program availability, reduced documentation availability, and reduced personal freedom all brought about by Debian revoking the right of developers to share effort put forth to package non-free software, I would be much more able to understand their points of view. -chet -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
