On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 09:25:00AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 05:37:02PM +0000, Henning Makholm wrote: > > > Do you have any arguments for this that do *not* basically reason > > > backwards from "we want this stuff to be in main, freedoms or not"? > > > > Well, I would start with "we want this stuff in main" and work from > > there; consider what freedoms we reasonably need and what we can > > reasonably expect. > > Sounds like "we want this in main, freedoms or not". I want it in
Actually, it's not. You'll note that I omitted the words "freedoms or not", because that's not what I intend. Frankly I can't spot the flaw in this approach. In general we want to distribute all useful bitstreams (programs, documentation and firmware) in Debian. However we are forced to disqualify the ones that don't have adequate freedoms. It's a subtractive process. We disqualify licenses that don't provide adequate freedom, rather than just allowing the ones with maximum freedom. The GPL isn't as free as it could be. It doesn't allow me to reuse GPL code in my proprietary program, or even under another perfectly free open-source license! The BSD license offers more freedoms. We consider the GPL to provide adequate freedom for Debian, though not it does not provide maximum freedom by any means. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
