Apologies for the butchered attribution. Not sure what caused it, but I
can't make sense of the attribution in Raul's post. I think the
double-quoted text below is me, and I'm sure the single-quoted text is
Raul.
I think he used XP as an example. Substitute in "X" if you prefer:
If I don't have X, it will be ethical to reject a request to
distribute X, since I do not have X.
HTH.
Except that statement doesn't make sense in the context of the current
discussion for arbitrary X.
I don't see why not.
How about:
If neither I nor my friends have X, it will be ethical to reject
a request to distribute X, since we do not have X.
If that's still a true statement, then why does changing 'neither I nor
my friends' to 'Debian does not' change that?
