Do you mean that by distributing non-free we do the best what we can? Why? Even if we can work on free instead of non-free?
When there is no completely free alternative, we distribute the best alternatives available.
If you think counter examples exist, please describe them.
I do not know counter examples, I do not know a lot about about non-free licenses. I know that packages which are there do not satisfy DFSG. Those which I know are: some hw drivers, pine?, RFC, possible some fonts. I understand what you are doing. I do not understand why it is the best what you can do.
I think we got an agreement on what is that action which is the source of all problems specific to non-free. It is distribution under non-free license. We also (I hope) got an agreement on the fact that providing people of what they need is good. We got an agreement (probaly I am too optimistic) on those examples which I provide, at least regarding the question on how the evil is produced. Is this true?
Is all of this above true?
-- Best regards, Sergey Spiridonov
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
