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

[MJ Ray]

David Paleino <address@hidden> wrote:
> Ok, I don't know the "current facts", but I personally don't agree in
> classifying Debian as Non-Free.
> Take a look at the DFSGs (Debian Free Software Guidelines): they're stricter
> even than FSF's statements. Consider, for example, that in Debian the GNU Free
> Documentation License is considered a non-free license (because it permits the
> existence of "invariant sections") [1].

It's not quite as simple as that.  A FDL-using manual with invariant
sections is not free software to either debian or FSF.  It's not free
software to debian because it does not give freedom to derive works.
It's not free software to FSF because it's not software in the FSF
meaning of the word, as I understand it.

Note that your reference [1] was a draft position statement.  What
actually passed was
http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_001#amendmenttexta
which leaves many questions unanswered.

Debian probably does contain non-free software, but so does every
other working operating system distribution and at least the debian
project regards containing non-free software as a bug, unlike many.

Hope that explains,
-- 
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/