* Michael Gilbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-09-03 21:38:09 CEST]: > if someone is willing to package and maintain it, then why not? i > thought the goal was for debian to be the universal operating system. > how can the system be universal if software is refused because it is > used to run non-dfsg software? if that is the case, then one should > reject wine, iceweasel, gcc, and any other software that could be used > to run non-dfsg software.
Your example is absolutely flawed because iceweasel's and gcc's main purpose is *not* to run non-dfsg software. And IMHO you are right about wine, because for a start it's not universal, it's arch specific. But even then this doesn't get you any further - calling up other more-or-less bad examples doesn't make yours any better, that's kindergarden argumentation line. > as i understand it, to become a debian developer, one has to agree to > adhere to the social contract Yes, but the social contract doesn't regulate where one puts their effort into. And some chose not to do so for non-free software, which is their right and yours to accept it. So long, Rhonda -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
