Am Thursday, dem 30. Oct 2008 schrieb sam.liddicott: > >Wed Oct 29 2008 7:38:33 pm GMT from Bjoern Schiessle to "P.B." > >Subject: Re: firefox, iceweasel, burningdog, icecat, ... > > > >... > >People who have no problem adding non-Free Software to their browser > >probably don't care that much about having a complete free operating > >system and/or browser. So they are probably not the main target group of > >IceCat. > > I enjoy the irony of the idea that free software should not allow people to > be non-free; reminding me of the US burn-the-flag debate on whether or not > flag burning should be a constitutionally supported expression of free speech > given that burning a flag sort of opposed the principles of the country and > constitution.
I don't know how this is related to this discussion. Nobody here wants to forbid non-free software. And I do not know anybody who says so. We just encourage to use Free Software, but we don't force it on anybody. > But I agree with most posters that free software needs to become relevant to > people to whom software freedom is not yet relevant and Ithink that this will > be done by being relevant in other ways which first means solving-the-problem > at hand. Who are these "most posters" who you refer to? I must have missed these postings, for I cannot find them. -- maybe P.B., but P.B. is not "most posters". > To me whether or not iceweasel should support non-free flash is another > incarnation of the older question: Should Stallman have used a non-free > compiler to develop gcc? The answer NOW is "yes" because it clearly DID lead > to more freedom, so there is no debate; He was working to write a freedom respecting replacement. That is good. The answer would have been the same, if he failed. It was worth trying anyway. > but the debate is still on about whether or not non-free flash is important. Most people, who ask for non-free flash are not involved in the process of making it free. And by the way: there is a free replacement now: http://www.gnu.org/software/gnash/ So thanks to the strong efforts of the GNU project we have the "freedom of choice" now. > For certain: those who say it > should not be supported are those who value a C compiler more than a flash > player, but the same is not true for many of those who are yet to embrace > free software and whose entry will be delayed until it meets ALL their needs > but only if WE insist on it. Again: I don't know whom you are referring to. AFAIK IceCat does work with the non-free flash plugin. The difference is only, that the default is a different plugin, ie. gnash, which is Free Software. -- AKFoerster _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
