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

[John]

On 20/03/13 14:15:01, Bob Ham wrote:
> Here, you're lamenting the fact that one can't "explain" how to
> install non-free software without keeping the FSF supporters happy.  
> Putting aside the issue of the difference between "explaining" and 
> "instructing", 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?

I suppose it depends on who you are talking to. Talking to a Debian 
user is easier to say this over here is free and meets the freedoms 
while your system does not. The Debian user may look at you strangely 
but agree and try to work towards it. OK mentioning USB does not work 
with the Hurd and you will lose them but at least they will respect 
you.
Talking to a room full of not already supporting FSF users and real 
world issues start to become apparent. Want to watch a news clip from 
the BBC? Want to listen to almost any music?


FSF.org supports DyneBolic and Trisquel 
http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html

Both incorporate MuSE and allow it to stream out via IceCast.
http://packages.trisquel.info/toutatis/allpackages

IceCast recommends OGG but it does mention how to set up an MP3 stream
http://www.icecast.org/docs/icecast-2.3.3/icecast2_basicsetup.html

So does that mean DyneBolic and Trisquel should both be removed from 
the FSF recommended and we should not promote them, because they have a 
package that in turn explains/instructs producing MP3s?

Or are those distributions OK because they do not explain/instruct and 
would IceCast be OK if it just hid secret knowledge?

Regards
John