The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: /opt and non-free

Joes Hess wrote:
> Fabrizio Polacco:
> > Thus we will have a great place where to install packages that we don't
> > think they belong to the Debian Gnu/Linux OS, like those in non-free,
> > contrib (partially) and user contributed ones.
> >
> > Actually our feelings about non-free software are "visible" only on the
> > ftp site or on CDs; why don't make clear this distinction even in the
> > installed machines?
> 
> Speaking as a user here, I don't *want* the layout of my filesystem to
> reflect the copyright of software on it. If I have software installed, I
> have decided that I can live with and abide by the copyright, and I don't 
> want to have to worry about what the copyright of that software is, anymore.

I strongly agree with Joey.  The filesystem should be driven by 
programming logic, not ethical values.  

Personally, I believe it's too bad that some software isn't free, and I 
will do my best to help make high quality software available to everyone.
But I don't _avoid_ non-free software just because it is non-free.
On the other hand, I believe that non-free and/or non-open standards 
are truly evil, and are a justification for avoiding a programming 
environment that uses them, to the extent permissible by one's work and 
other circumstances.  

Susan