[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Talking about non-free software on the list

From: Bob Ham
Subject: Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Talking about non-free software on the list
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 13:57:49 +0000
User-agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.7.2

On 2013-03-21 19:10, Simon Ward wrote:
Bob Ham <address@hidden> wrote:

Suppose there are two pieces of software, A and B.  If A depends on B
and B is non-free then A is not free.

Ish. As pointed out in another post, A itself could be considered to
be free. However, the dependency on non-free software presents a
problem. You cannot have a free system with that dependency.

Precisely. Here, I'm describing A as "not free" meaning its users have their freedom curtailed, as opposed to the licensing of A not allowing the four freedoms. I specifically avoided describing A as "non-free".

Perhaps a better phrasing would be "the users of A are not free".

Bob Ham <address@hidden>

for (;;) { ++pancakes; }

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]