On 12/06/2014 03:13 PM, Aldemir Akpinar wrote:
>
> On 6 Dec 2014 15:24, "hellekin" <hellekin@???
> <mailto:hellekin@dyne.org>> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/06/2014 03:31 AM, chris wrote:
>> > antisocial is an emotive word, I don't see anything wrong with non-free
>> > and contrib
>
> Well I hate systemd, however people are right saying that we should
> honour freedom of choice. So if you drop non free and contrib you'll be
> leaving me no choice to use the software that I must use (I.e. hba
> cards, CPU firmware).
> So if this is (also) going to be a distribution for sysadms who have all
> sorts of proprietary hardware, you need to have those nonfree software.
> Also keeping things as they are as Debian's gives you a choice of
> running a truly free os. So let's not deprive anyone from their freedom.
> --
> Aldemir
>
*** That's a different approach, and I can sympathize with
that--although I bear no hate of systemd, I just find it over-the-top,
impractical, invasive, and I don't trust it.

It's fundamentally different to promote the use of non-free software
(e.g., by merging it in a "community" repository with contrib) and to
allow its use, but not by default. The principal difference is that the
former attitude considers hardware vendor lock as an acceptable
situation, while the latter considers it an unacceptable technological
development that users are not able to control their computing needs.

For the record, I believe the main reason for which Debian is not listed
on the GNU 100% free software distros to be because it ships with the
non-free repository by default. If non-free were treated like backports
or experimental, and the sysadmin would have to enable it by hand, I
think it could enter the list.

==
hk

-- 
 _ _     We are free to share code and we code to share freedom
(_X_)yne Foundation, Free Culture Foundry * https://www.dyne.org/donate/