Sorry for top-posting; it's Android. I don't think he has an issue with the governance of the kernel project per se; he's just presenting a fact. You can't really have a completely free Linux distro or install option, which is what he proposed, when the very kernel of the OS itself is non-free.
David Schlesinger <le...@access-company.com> wrote: >On 6/9/10 1:21 PM, "Danny Piccirillo" <danny.picciri...@ubuntu.com> wrote: >> >> Upstream linux is not free. That is why LinuxLibre was created. >> >> http://libresoft.es/Members/herraiz/blog/linux-is-not-free-software >> >> I have doubts that this was unintentional. Here's a list of nonfree stuff in >> Linux: >> >> http://manulix.wikidot.com/kernel-blobs > >Danny, if you or anyone else has an issue with the governance of the kernel >project, attempting to address it via an end-run through a "litmus test" of >Ubuntu's support for "software freedom" seems a rather passive-aggressive >way to go about it. I don't see much productive coming out of this >discussion. > >If you're not happy with the way the kernel project is being run, I suggest >you'd do better to go talk to Linus and Andrew Morton about it. > >If Ubuntu's governance is not to your liking, there are plenty of other >distros. If none of those is to your liking, you can roll your own. > > >-- >Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list >Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com >Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
