I perfectly understand you... but I persist: you are wrong. The "freedom
bugs" are usually solved by not including a package, what is pretty easy.
Most of the work is about *identifying* the software not respecting the
users' freedoms. That can be tricky but this work is "mutualized", not
duplicated. See this page for instance:
http://libreplanet.org/wiki/List_of_software_that_does_not_respect_the_Free_System_Distribution_Guidelines
It takes as a base Debian's split between free and unfree software and lists
89 adjustments with rationales.
If you are atually talking about the projects that fix freedom issues in
upstream projects (instead of just not including the applications), they
mainly happen upstream too: all free distribution use Linux-libre, all of
them can use GNU Icecat and those are the two only such projects I can figure
out. You can answer that Trisquel does not use Icecat and you are right. It
could though. It is a choice.
Nobody objects to an eleventh free distribution. People object to the desire
for "the one true" distribution. Such a distribution would not attend every
need fulfilled by the current free distributions. For instance, you would not
have ABrowser but only Icecat even if Ruben has valid arguments to prefer not
to reuse Icecat (waste of memory, of space on the ISOs, etc.). Take Musix as
another example. Do you really believe that the one true distribution would
fulfil the needs of Musix's users (including a real-time kernel)?
