Re: [Hampshire] Iceweasel

Tim wrote:
> So along comes
> Mr user and then install all the non-free software that Debian have spent so
> long producing. The user is not interested in Debian philiosophy, its free
> and it does what he wants.

I am interested in Debian philosophy. The DFSG exists to protect me and
protect the software that I use.

> While Debian does have such high morale stand point regarding free software
> then maybe they should look at the end users as well, those users that want
> free software (as in it does not cost me anything to buy) and are not
> interested in the interlectaul property of the software and changes that
> somebody might want make\add. You could argue that what K\Ubuntu is, Debian
> which includes the non free bits, but it is not Debian.

Many users may not be interested in the philosophy but those users are
not inconvenienced by the philosophy either. In fact, regardless of
whether they care or not, the DFSG guarantees that the software in
Debian will always remain free and maintainable. This, for example,
guarantees that users won't ever have to pay for updated tools to use
their existing data.

That some users (clearly, yourself included) may not understand the
benefits of DFSG-free software is not an argument for abandoning the DFSG.

> While I can understand the Debian philosophy I find its almost in conflict
> with itself because as soon as it hits the users hand the majority of them
> are undoing Debian work and installing non-free software.

That's not a conflict.

I don't think it's a majority of users either. Almost anything users
will need is in Debian in easily installable form, so I would expect the
majority of users to be using the DFSG-free packages.

Dan