On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 12:14:59PM -0500, Richard Salmon wrote: > IMO, a big part of the problem here is that when you say "recommend" in > this context what you actually mean appears (based on the discussion > here) to be something that most people would express as "not > deliberately erect barriers against". > > The evidence of this discussion shows that's not a good description > for what I am saying. Many of the people on this list were told that > I want OpenBSD to "erect barriers against" installing non-free > programs. And their words show that they think this means designing > the system so that installing non-free programs is impossible. (I > have not suggested such a thing.) > > My usage of the "recommend" fits in normal usage. If you include > program FOO in a list of programs that could be installed, implicitly > that recommends installing FOO as an option for people to consider. > > Perhaps "implicitly recommend" would be a clearer description of this > particular case.
Once again: Likewise, the inclusion of platform BAR in a list of platforms on which a program FOO may be installed, as well as the availability of binaries for the FOO to run on BAR, implicitly recommends BAR as a choice of platform on which to run FOO, for people and/or enterprises to consider. (Those who would know have informed us that such a situation for gcc and emacs has prompted numerous migrations to Windows. So far nobody has informed us of numerous migrations from free software to non-free software prompted by the ports tree.) In each case "recommends" is inaccurate insofar as its content partakes of encouragement and the like. It has been pointed out, some time ago and on at least two occasions, that the most accurate way to describe the situation is to say that the ports tree facilitates the installation and maintenance of third party software, not all of which is free. It is clear to anybody who knows what is the ports tree that it is the most accurate description. Of course it is a separate matter to want to use an accurate description (even if it is short, clear and not technical). On Thu, 13 Dec 2007, you did admit > I should more precisely have said that the OpenBSD ports system > includes instructions for fetching, building and installing > specific non-free programs. (in: http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=119757178526484). Then, on Fri, 14 Dec 2007, you did promise > As a courtesy to the OpenBSD developers, and avoid the risk > of confusion, I will try from now on to state this in a more > precise way. (in: http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=119767255302887).
