Just to clarify my earlier comment -- I'm generally sympathetic to the concerns motivating free software (this is part of the reason why I'm switching to Linux after using Mac for a couple of decades now).
But when free software advocates insist that the documentation -- documentation, not code -- must not help users install non-free components, then I have to get off the train. Where's the boundary? "Sorry, your distribution can no longer be considered free because you have a web forum and some user mentioned once how to install flash"? I don't know if it's really that restrictive, but if it is, that's left the realm of common sense. The other thing that bugs me about this is the use of a broad word -- "free" -- for a specific idea from the FSF. When everybody has a different idea of "free," that conversation isn't going very far. So, generally sympathetic to the FSF's goals, yes, but also skeptical. James -- James Harkins /// dewdrop world [email protected] http://www.dewdrop-world.net "Come said the Muse, Sing me a song no poet has yet chanted, Sing me the universal." -- Whitman blog: http://www.dewdrop-world.net/words audio clips: http://www.dewdrop-world.net/audio more audio: http://soundcloud.com/dewdrop_world/tracks
--- [email protected] http://identi.ca/group/puredyne irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
