"Sergey V. Spiridonov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Sven Luther wrote: > >>> If developer agrees with such a limitation he is not able to modify >>> this program to help his friend to adapt it for his >>> needs. Developer will not be able to distribute modifications to >>> others who also need such an improvenment. This contradicts human >>> ethics, because help is ethical. > >> Yeah sure, whatever. Please tell me how this developer would be better >> able to help this friend, if the orinal work is not available at all. In >> either case, he can start from scratch, and reimplement the program in a >> free fashion, and thus help his friend. > > If the original work is not available at all, developer will not be > able to act non-ethical. > > > Also, notice that this same argument can be hold against your > > argument. If we can help someone by providing non-free packages, and > > that their licence allow them to use it, is it not counter-ethical for > > us to not distribute such non-free package ? > > If we have something to distribute and we reject to help people who > need it, it is not ethical.
So when some ask me to distribute the ocaml-doc package because they need it, and I refuse, it is not ethical ? so we must not drop non-free, or it will be non ethical. Please... > But if we drop this something (erase, > delete, burn), we will not act non-ethical anymore when someone > request it from us. But we will act non-ethical when we Will drop it, because there people who need it know, as it is, with no modification. -- Rémi Vanicat
