From: Sven Joachim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Jérôme Marant wrote: >>Yeah, after all, the social contract merely states: >> >> We will never make the system require the use >> of a non-free component. >> >>Now I realize what that means: "The system" does not require the >>non-free documentation, although one could argue that its users and >>developers probably will require it. Quite sophisticated. > > > Perhaps grabbing documentation from non-free will be a minor inconvenience > for many users. We shall see.
I think there's more to it than that. A lot of information crucial to Debian's development (such as the glibc documentation) will be moved to non-free, and I guess that almost every Debian developer will need to install one or the other non-free documentation package. Thus, the claim "Debian is 100% free, because we have removed the offending GFDL documentation" is dishonest, in my opinion. The sentence "Debian is 100% free" is a lie in the sense that Debian developpers maintain contrib and non-free repositories. I do not want non-free to hit my sources.lst but in the other hand, I will have to add it in order to read GFDL'ed documentations. What a mess !! UTUTO is ready to be installed on my main machines (UTUTO is *really* 100% free) Xavier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
