Chris Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 1. It will have minimal effects since people will still be able to use > non-free software. > > 2. It will have far-reaching effects since Debian (the corporate > entity) will expend fewer resources in support of people wanting to > use non-free software.
I'm somenoe who has made these points, or something like them, but I think they are both mispresented in order to make them look contradictory. The correct version of 1 is: 1) It cause minimal disruption of users since people will still find it as easy to use non-free software if they want. The correct version of 2 is: 2) It will have important effects on Debian, because we will maintain our actual focus, devoting our resources to Debian. non-free is not part of Debian, so why are we distributing it? For the convenience of the users. If it were not for that, we would never consider it. Since we can meet the convenience of the users in a way which does not require weakening the principles upon which Debian was founded. we should do it.
