Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I am sure almost no one consider FSF's manuals unfree just because > > DSFG thinks they are, > > As far as I am concerned, the DFSG is the canonical litmus > test ... so I don't see how your statement can be > correct.
"Almost" was the key word above. FSF is one of organizations i would consider authorities on definitions of "freedom". DSFG surely is an authority too, for me. But just because DFSG does not agree with FSF on one point, does not mean you have to defeat the whole purpose of "free/unfree" separation by putting FSF's documentation nonfree. . Calling FSF documentation itself unfree is like... never mind, i just can't think of anything. In short, it's just ridiculous. > Well, as far as we are concerned, things are either free, > depend on non-free things, or are non free. We do not distinguish > between types of non-freeness -- like free for non-commercial use, well, you might as well. It's not like debian hasn't made compromises before. Including a "nonfree" section in debian itself was a compromise. And it's not like we are asking you to commit a major blasphemy here. At least you could put it in a "controvertial" section instead of "nonfree". By forcing us to put "nonfree" in our sources.list, you are going to defeat the very purpose of the "nonfree" section for us. > This is not a political thing. Exactly! That is what i am saying. See? I don't even mind even if you label FSF's documents nonfree (while you and FSF work out issues). _All I request is that you allow us users (who still consider them free, and I bet, most of us do!) a way to continue to use them easily while still keeping the rest of the "nonfree" world off my debian box._ FSF and DFSG both watch out for our freedoms. Arising of some differences of opinions is natural. What is important is that you respect each other, work the differences out, and while they are being worked out, allow us users to continue to make use of the debian system productively... If one labels something as "free", that is good enough for me, the user. I want to consider anythign as free as long as either FSF or DFSG calls it free, and want to use it. Getting "Free Software Foundation"'s own manuals labeled unfree and removed from sources.list is just so unimaginable... So, I end my posts with a repeat of this request: _All I request is that you allow us users (who still consider them free, and I bet, most of us do!) a way to continue to use them easily while still keeping the rest of the "nonfree" world off my debian box._ DG http://gnufans.net/~deego/ --
