On Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 12:01 PM Stefan Monnier <monn...@iro.umontreal.ca>
wrote:
> >> > I find this state of affair rather sad and am disappointed by both
> >> > Debian and the FSF for not finding a compromise. It ends up promoting
> >> > the use of the non-free repository, which I think neither project
> wants.
> > It's _not_ a Debian problem in one sense: it's the FSF's licence.
>
> I doubt pointing fingers will help resolve this problem.
>
> I think this problem should be easy to solve, all it takes is for both
> Debian and the FSF to agree that this situation is simply unacceptable,
> and then work together to find a solution.
>
Well the difference in views between the two is different at a fundamental
level. So neither side accepts the others' view as fundamentally compatible
on the main issue: what is free software, of any species?
> Or we could say "it's in non-free - not part of Debian - so we really
> > don't care and if it breaks, well so what"
>
> That's a cop out. Just as is FSF's position that it's Debian's problem.
> It means both the FSF and Debian consider the current situation
> as acceptable.
>
Again, I would phrase it as the expected outcome from a permanent
difference in outlook. Ubuntu, for example, didn't really see Debian in
that "Debian view" either. So they took it in their own direction, they do
a great job in their way. They are allowed, that's the value of open-source
licensing and free software. Ubuntu has taken flack from some people for
their approach over time. Generally they ignore it.
Stefan
>
>
