Forgive my ignorance here, this is my first response to a topic like this.
My algorithm for personal computing has always been:

if (OS, container, software, etc) contains non-free software
    then don’t use it
else-if (OS, container, software, etc) is free AND allows non-free software
to run
    then use
    AND don’t install supported non-free software
…

Is it not that simple? Should the question not be about the core and not
the content?

No matter how many free programs can run on Windows, for example, that OS
will never be part of an FSF member’s personal software toolset unless it
was moved over in its entirety to a free software license. So, too, should
be the rule for anything that runs upon a free OS.  If it contains non-free
software or runs upon a non-free/non-open hardware component, no matter how
many free programs it runs it cannot be considered part of an FSF-approved
toolset.

This has worked for me for more than 20 years. I have never had an issue as
the core must always be free, and if non-free software is allowed by a free
core I simply don’t install that software and I still am free.

- GNUian

On Sun, Jul 2, 2023 at 7:46 PM Richard Stallman <r...@gnu.org> wrote:

> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
>
>   > - i was only vaguely trying to explain that to remove some
>   > undesirable or unpopular software from the parabola repos is not a
>   > "deal-breaker" for any user who still desires it - it is only a
>   > minor inconvenience to find the recipe and install from source
>
> I got that point.
>
> That is more reason why we should not hesitate to ask for exclusion of
> ScummVM even if it has a little bit of minor use for free games.
>
> --
> Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
> Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
> Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
> Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to