On Sat, Nov 22, 2003 at 01:06:05AM -0600, Matthew Kennedy wrote: > Seriously though, it is my impression that you may be surprised how > many folks care that their box uses free software only. You might > want to check the Debian news out of late. There's a proposal to do > away with(?) non-free in their distro (ie. clause 5. in their social > contract would be removed). > > I suppose I am dismayed that we are failing to promote free software > over proprietary software.
It is not Gentoo's goal to become a free-software only distribution. It is
important that we, as metadistribution, give the users the choice to choose
for "free-software only" if they want. I'm sure we can all agree on this
ability to choose.
So yes, to use your example, it is important that gamers don't quit Gentoo
because of a decision we force upon them, instead of having them decide
theirselves.
Implementing an ACCEPT_LICENSES variable is a very important proposal. The
question is what we would use "per default". Do we only accept free (as in
speech) licenses per default, and have the user choose the others
individually, or accept free (as in beer) licenses per default, having the
user restrict/extend the amount of licenses he wishes?
I can certainly agree if we go for the former (from a GNU/OSI perspective),
but also if the latter is chosen (from a userfriendly perspective).
Wkr,
Sven Vermeulen
--
^__^ And Larry saw that it was Good.
(oo) Sven Vermeulen
(__) http://www.gentoo.org Gentoo Documentation Project
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
