Re: non-DFSG section and CD distributers
> > >- We are always right and we must be right and others
> > > must do things the way we have "demonstrated" it.
> >
> > Others can do as they damn well please. We, however, shall do
> > as the DFSG states we shall act. Have you ever seen us tell
> > miscrosoft how to act?
>
> No, but I've seen Bruce telling Intel how to act and in which form to
> present us with bugfix.
No, kidding! And what was the kernel-makers response? I think Linus had hi
_own_ patch out within a day or so. Allthough I wouldn't mind telling
Microsoft what to do for awhile...
> > > - If you do not play by our rules then we dont play
> >
> > Right. This is called ethics.
>
> Or rudeness.
Or arrogance, cockiness, conceit. etc, etc...
> > >- We are unable to cooperate with others since we will
> > > reject all compromise.
> >
> > Yes, we refuse to compromise our values just to play lackey to
> > other interests. We always co-operate with free software developers.
>
> And WE will decide who's writing free software.
> > > - We will insist on our words and the meaning we give them.
> > > We have are the right (tm) software worldview.
> >
> > Yes, we are unequivocal, and we mean what we say. We even
> > define the terms we use so there is no room for misunderstanding or
> > newspeak.
>
> Yeah-yeah. With Social Contract full of statements which potentialy can
> be treated any way you like. For pointing to them I was awarded a title of
> "Talmudic Interpreter" by out project leader.
>
> > >- We do not bother with inferior low lifes who have
> > > not seen the (GPL) life yet and are refusing to understand
> > > that we mean GPL when we say free.
> >
> > You are the one making the value judgement. Is internet
> > explorer free? People say that it is, since there is no up-front cost
> > to it. Is Nestscape almost free, since it only costs $50? We define
> > what we mean when we talk about free software. What's so hard to
> > understand?
>
> Exactly, but even WE agree on different levels of freeness:
> we have non-us, non-free (which is still free in some sense - can be
> distributed on our ftp site, etc.). Why not be clear on what we mean
> each time?
>
> > >- We believe one day all the world will only use GPL software...
> >
> > Hope. Not believe, Hope. Imagine ...
>
> This would be a nightmare we had in Russia with everything and everybody
> "free" ... Brrr...
>
> > > In short: You better have nothing to do with us.
> >
> > ..if you are a nasty non-free software write ;-). Stronder
> > than I'd put it, but we need *someone* to prmote the concept of free
> > software. We are it, I guess.
>
> Free for the sake of free? Or free for the sake of someting else?
> I stand for the second one.
myself, too. And come on. "*someone* to promote the concept of free
software". By the name of Linus, that is almost insulting to the
Linux/GNU/etc community as a whole... Party on Debian, savior to the
world.....
> > > Excellent PR.
> >
> > I agree.
>
> I don't.
neither do I (obviously :-)
Paul J Thompson
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: