Re: Debian vs gNewSense -- FS criteria

[Richard Stallman]

    I think many of us would accept the original sense of software as a
    sort of contrast to hardware, to include all the files on the computer
    and some other stuff besides, and so avoiding defining freedom by
    distinguishing bitstreams.

You can have whatever views you like, but this activity is meant to
provide a job site for the GNU Project, which meas following the GNU
Project's policies, and its definitions.

In the GNU Project, "software" means programs only.  Our term for text
that explains how to use the system is "documentation".  We insist
that software and documentation follow our standards of freedom.  (Not
Debian's standards -- ours.)  However, works of art and opinion are a
different matter.  We do not hold that they must be free, and our
published statements of positions are not free.

Those are the GNU Projects positions and policies.  If you want to
follow different policies then you had best start your own activity.

    > What makes Debian unacceptable is that its inclusion of non-free
    > software is not a mistake.  It is an explicit policy decision.

    Debian includes no non-free software except as a serious bug.

Debian includes non-free software on its servers in the "non-free"
section.  This was thoroughly discussed a few days ago, so you know
what I'm talking about.  Please don't waste our time by ignoring it.