It's an interesting point: is this distribution supposed to contain
only Free software, or is it supposed to force its users into using
only free software? I think it's the distinction between the American
revolution and the French revolution; becoming too radical can be a
major problem.
Shall we excise Wine? It's free software, but it's free software that
might, possibly, allow the user to use non-free software (of course,
they might be wanting to use a Windows-only bit of Free software; it's
not inconcievable, especially when it comes to gaming).
Let's, hypothetically, say we developed a fork of Wine that only
allowed Free software to be run (never mind the impracticality of
that). That would violate software freedom zero , that the user be
allowed to run his software as he will. Ironically, freedom to run an
interact with non-free software is essential to the freedom of software.
I think that freedom is sufficient--that any Free package ought to be
included in the repositories, so far as is practical. It is not for us
to decide how the user runs his system; that would make the system
non-Free. Merely provide a high-quality, cohesive system comprising
solely Free software, and if the user wants to hang himself on
slavery's chains, let him.
JB
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
gNewSense-users mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-users