Oh yeah, of course, only you are pure and holy just using 100% free trisquel.
It's because of people like you why the free software movement is still an
extremely tiny movement most people don't want to hear about.
There is this huge, reliable distro which just deblobed their kernel and
showed their strong relationship to free software;
I doubt that without debian anyone of us would be able to use a free
operating system today. Their contribution to free software is incredible,
and they provide the possibility to run a 100% free system.
Now you come along throwing dirt at them just because there remain some tiny
problems;
recommendation of non-free software during the installation process is one of
them.
I can't consider the possibility of enabling a non-free repo which is
disabled by default as a problem, but if someone does, it has to be
considered as a tiny one.
You can install non-free software on trisquel as well; the fact that this
software doesn't "belong" to the trisquel project is just a political one
without a practical difference.
No, Debian isn't perfect, but neither is trisquel.
In trisquel, non-free Thunderbird is included for instance and we all know
about privacy issues like the google name server.
Should I "laugh at trisquel" like jxself laughed at debian because of this
minor issues?
Should I claim "trisquel doesn't care about freedom"?.
It's pure hypocrisy to do so;
If Debian dies, I don't see any hope for the free software movement any more.
Ubuntu really doesn't care about freedom, and trisquel is based on ubuntu.
Who want's to replace the huge workload of the debian team? You, the holy
free software knight? Ruben?
Sorry, but I think shame on YOU.
