Craig Box wrote:
I don't mean to sound negative, as Matt claims, but I am some what shocked by the attitude of shipping non-free non-oss is ok, because someday it *might* become completely oss.....
Doesn't make sense to me.
http://nonfree.alioth.debian.org/
Non-free is for packages that are free enough for Debian to distribute, but not free enough to meet the DFSG.
Sun Java suits this case perfectly, assuming that the DLJ has actually relaxed the licensing agreement enough to allow Debian to distribute it. Whether or not it has is the argument.
There is no requirement for software in non-free to be OSS. The NVIDIA and ATI drivers definitely aren't.
Well, I guess this is were we differ (greatly) in opinions. I do not use anything that is not free, with the expection of my BIOS. No closed video drivers, no flash, no Sun Java, no mp3 and so on.... I do not think its OK to distribute them and think its odd that members of the NZOSS seem to be OK with closed, proprietary applications/drivers etc. *If* Sun's Java was OSS (read GPL/LGPL/LGLPL/MIT/X11/BSD/MPL not CDDL) and I was of the same opinion, then, yes, I would be an arse, however, its (Sun's Java) not and until the day it is, I will remain a skeptic. So, instead of dragging this thread on, perhaps we should leave it here: Value your freedom, or you will lose it, teaches history. "Don't bother us with politics," respond those who don't want to learn. - Richard Stallman Michael