On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 10:06:23AM -0600, Chad C. Walstrom wrote: > On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 08:23:57AM -0600, Raul Miller wrote: > > However, I received some criticism -- perhaps valid -- that "the > > Debian system" was itself too ambiguous to stand by itself. > > What I don't understand is the idea that the phrase Debian is ambiguous. > "Debian will remain 100% free." What is wrong with this phrase? Remove > terms such as "software", "main", "distribution", and "system" and we > are left with Debian, as a whole, which will remain free as in libre'. > Doesn't that say exactly what we want? Non-free is not part of Debian. > This idea is stated already in clauses 1 and 5. How is this not clear?
I think Anthony objected to this, saying that 'Debian' included non-free (as the whole ftp service is part of Debian), while 'The Debian distribution' does not. I could be mistaken though, and I don't have the nerve to dig through the -vote archives right now. If I misunderstood him, I'd like to apalogize. Michael -- Michael Banck Debian Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.advogato.org/person/mbanck/diary.html
