On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 07:24:17PM +0100, Remi Vanicat wrote: > Sergey Spiridonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Daniel Burrows wrote: > >> On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 12:43:22PM +0100, Sergey Spiridonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> was heard to say: > >> > >>> Producing and distributing non-free is ethical. If I produce a > >>> package with closed source and distribute it, it is ethical, since > >>> it help people to solve their tasks. It compels me to non-ethical > >>> action when someone, for example, will request sources from me. > >> Suppose you package foo-nonfree, a package whose source code is not > >> available. Some time later, a user requests the sources from you. You > >> reply, "I'm sorry, I don't have the source code and so I can't give it > >> to you." > > > > I do not have ready example on how one can compel himself to act > > unethical if he distributes program without sources. I propose to > > finish discussing the example which I already presented, before we > > will start to discuss other cases. > > Well, I've read it again, and I will put it here : > > > I will try to present an example. Let's say we have program 'A' > > without permition to distribute modified sources. It's not > > absolutely non-free - you have freedom to learn how program works, > > to modify it for your own needs, to distribute it without > > modifications. It is unique and there is no free analog. > > > If developer agrees with such a limitation he is not able to modify > > this program to help his friend to adapt it for his needs. Developer > > will not be able to distribute modifications to others who also need > > such an improvenment. This contradicts human ethics, because help is > > ethical. > > So, if I'm not able to modify a free software because I lack time, I'm > contradicting human ethic ? so I must drop my job to have more time > and to be more ethical ? I'm not sure it was what you said, but it > look like. If I don't adapt a software to someone needs, I'm not doing > any good, but I'm neither doing any bad, so it is a neutral action on > the ethical scale. > > By the way, my friend will be better with an ocaml-doc with an error > than without an ocaml-doc, and it will be even better if this > ocaml-doc is well integrated into the debian system (with doc-base and > all other interesting thing).
And furthermore, because of our good communication with ocaml upstream, if there is really an error in ocaml-doc, it is absolutely no trouble getting it fixed. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
