Re: Free Software criteria -- about "Software distributions"

[MJ Ray]

Richard Stallman <address@hidden> wrote:
> "Automatically install" is too weak a criterion for what we need to
> reject.
>
> Here's a real life example.  Most systems let the users select
> packages to install, and most packages are disabled by default.  If a
> non-free package is disabled by default, then the system does not
> "automatically install" it.  But its presence in the package selection
> system is still bad.

If the non-free package is present in a package selection system, that
usually means that selecting a free software package may automatically
install it, in certain circumstances.  So, I think "automatically
install" is strong enough to cover that real life example.

> The criterion we use in the GNU Project is that of "promoting or
> encouraging the use of non-free software".  This means anything that
> would tend to lead people towards non-free programs.

I think that is far too broad.  The GNU Project itself encourages the
use of non-free-software: its manuals.  The only free distribution
would be a bug-free debian GNU/Hurd, if one used that criterion - and
maybe not even that, if mere capability to install non-debian non-free
software counts as "promoting or encouraging" its use.

Well, this problem is far away from solved.

Regards,
-- 
MJ Ray http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html tel:+44-844-4437-237 -
Webmaster-developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder,
consumer and workers co-operative member http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ -
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/