[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: free vs. non-free debate
- Subject: Re: free vs. non-free debate
- From: Alessandro Rubini <>
- Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 09:40:21 +0100
- Resent-Cc: recipient list not shown: ;
- Resent-Date: 1 Nov 1999 09:28:08 -0000
- Resent-Message-ID: <wXmfm.A.QUC.n0VH4@murphy>
> I think you missed the point of those two comments. [...]
Yes, you are right. I misunderstood the second comment. I'm sorry for
the extra confusion I brought in.
More to the subject matter, I wrote:
>> In my opinion, the LDP should collect and organize documentation for
>> the Linux kernel and free software [...] excluding non-free components.
> This is short sighted IMHO, and the LDP wasn't created to only document
> free stuff, it was created to create free documentation.
Yes, you are right. But I think libre documentation makes no sense for
non-libre software. If we support that, we'll be a free(gratis)
advertising forum for developers of non-libre software. That's bad.
If someone contributes software to the community, the community may
contribute back documentation. That's fine. If someone doesn't
contribute to the community, the community is not expected to
Please note that I'm not against helping people in their problems,
independently of the freeness of the relevant packages. It's the LDP,
as an organization, that should not promote non-free software by
endorsing the documenting task.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org