* Thomas Bushnell, BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [040308 20:57]:
> If people want that, they can have it now. Having non-free in Debian
> does not prevent it from also existing elsewhere.
>
> Moreover, the whole point is to *not* have it be officially
> recognized.
And this is also the most absurd point about it. But perhaps
I also just guess the wrong intentions into other people, as
I guess other people's points might share my goals: To finaly
allow people to have to cope with nothing but free software.
Telling in the same message that Debian should make it hands
dirty by supplying infrastructure for non-free while pushing
away any argument for need with a "get it elsewhere", is the
cruel dishonesty denoting this whole "non-free removal"
discussion.
Having a non-free section is a shame. The shame that there are
still people we could not help enough to work with only free
software. That there are still people not beeing able to control
what their computers do and beeing at propiatary software author's
mercy.
But closing our eyes against this shame and/or not accepting it,
will not make this shame go away. It will only make it growing.
MfG,
Bernhard R. Link
