> > > > For Debian to be "100% Free Software", it first must be "100% Software", > > > > right? > > > > One issue here is that "Debian" is an adjective, and you have to dub > > > in the noun. If that noun is "Software", you get a different meaning > > > than if that noun is "Copyrighted Works". As it happens, the updated > > > social contract uses the noun "System" -- a somewhat ambiguous noun, > > > but to some degree that ambiguity is good because it lets us branch out > > > into new things (new distributions for new architectures, most likely). > > On Wed, May 26, 2004 at 08:26:29AM -0400, Walter Landry wrote: > > Except that you are then ignoring the clarifying text in the Social > > Contract, which states: > > > > We promise to keep the Debian GNU/Linux Distribution entirely free > > software. ^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > That restricts the ambiguity but does not eliminate it.
This is degenerating into a "did not!" -- "did too!" argument. The clarification makes it clear that the Debian distribution must be 100% free software. It does not speak of Debian software or Debian copyrighted works. I don't understand how you could interpret otherwise. Cheers, Walter Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
