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

[MJ Ray]

Bob Ham <address@hidden>
> The examples you gave do not contradict my assertion that inclusion of 
> *instructions* implies following those instructions is OK.

OK, classic internet examples: bomb-making instructions;
and how to circumvent DRM.

Would publishing those mean that the publisher thinks all possible
uses of them is OK?  Clearly not!

> [...] why would do you want to explain to users how to install 
> non-free software in the first place?  Why is there a desire to 
> communicate with users about the installation non-free software?

As explained earlier, I think there are two desires there:

1. if we don't support their "industry-standard" hardware as a
temporary migration measure, some users will dismiss free software as
unusable;

2. if we don't do it, someone worse will do it, without any warnings
or exhortations to replace the nasty hardware.

I'm not sure how much I mind 1, but I know some people it's important
to.  Desire 2 is very strong to me because I've seen too many users
harmed by following dodgy warningless instructions.

Hope that informs,
-- 
MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op.
http://koha-community.org supporter, web and library systems developer.
In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Available for hire (including development) at http://www.software.coop/