Re: General Resolution: Removing non-free
On 6 Jun 2000, John Goerzen wrote:
> Rationale:
>
> Any one of the following should at least justify the examination of
> the issue.
>
> 1. Non-free software is no longer an essential or standard part of a
> typical installation.
>
> Whereas at one time, most everyone used non-free software such as
> Netscape for web browsing, acroread for PDF reading, or xv for graphic
> viewing, there are quality free replacements for all of these
> programs. Therefore, the rationale of "we need non-free for usable
> standard system" no longer applies.
>
> There has been some discussion about whether mozilla is ready for
> prime time right now. The point can be argued. However, let me put
> forth the following observations: 1) it will almost certainly be ready
> by the time woody is released (in about 2 years, of the potato time is
> any guide); and 2) using one program to justify the continued support
> of all current non-free programs is a weak argument at best.
The only exception that I can figure out for this would perhaps be the JDK
and related packages. Is there perhaps some free alternative to this?
=--------------------------------------------------=
Mike Kelly <kellym@nbnet.nb.ca>
'Two roads diverged in a wood, and I --
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.'
-- Robert Frost
=--------------------------------------------------=
Reply to: