Debian aims for FSF endorsement

I guess

Quoting:A free system distribution must not steer users towards obtaining any nonfree information for practical use, or encourage them to do so. The system should have no repositories for nonfree software and no specific recipes for installation of particular nonfree programs. Nor should the distribution refer to third-party repositories that are not committed to only including free software; even if they only have free software today, that may not be true tomorrow. Programs in the system should not suggest installing nonfree plugins, documentation, and so on.

that is the sticking point.

I thought that Debian has struck a fairly reasonable balance. The extra steps required to access "third-party" proprietary software made the point, without being hostile to users' practical needs.

I would call this approach "pragmatic, but not (merely) expedient".

As far as I'm concerned, this worked rather well. It made the point, and educated users, without punishing users over ideological purity.

> I thought that Debian has struck a fairly reasonable balance.

IMO, the difference is that Debian cares about their users needs. I won't say the FSF doesn't, but it's strictly a second tier concern.

@bs by way of @jd --

The problem, especially as regards the FSF, is that Debian struck a reasonable balance.

Debian doesn't enable contrib and non-free by default. That should be enough to satisfy.

"the installer in some cases recommends these nonfree firmware files for the peripherals on the machine."

As an end user, I consider this a valuable bit of information.

Quoting:Debian doesn't enable contrib and non-free by default. That should be enough to satisfy.

Nope. Nothing but ideological purity will do.

Any distro that the FSF recommends is one I know by default is severely crippled in terms of hardware support. Thanks, but no thanks. My operating system choice is not a religion. It has to do the job or it's of no use to me.

FSF has to practice what it preaches. Debian has to release a complete usable useful solution.

I personally don't see why Debian should care whether they are or aren't on the FSF list.

Does it make a difference? No. And who cares? Hardly any few.

To be honest here, all it took was one car ride with RMS to knock the stars out of my eyes. I thought I had the privilege of shuttling him from hotel to speaking engagement here in Austin a few years back. What I ended up with was a smug and self-absorbed geek sitting next to me, refusing to engage in the simplest of conversations and rudely slamming the door while I was asking him what time he wanted to be picked up.

I know RMS has his followers here but when you deal with the person and not the persona, the shiny paint gets chipped off fast. I haven't had a thing to do with the FSF since.

Oh yeah, and what Caitlyn said...

Quoting:FSF has to practice what it preaches. Debian has to release a complete usable useful solution.

That's my point. The two seem to be mutually incompatible.

Quoting:I personally don't see why Debian should care whether they are or aren't on the FSF list.

Does it make a difference? No. And who cares? Hardly any few.

That is a small but loud minority who often make FOSS look bad. These are the people who, when you try to sanely answer interoperability questions on a business website discussion forum, ask why Microsoft has any right to exist. They are not helpful and often make the community as a whole look like a bunch of loons.

Quoting:What I ended up with was a smug and self-absorbed geek sitting next to me, refusing to engage in the simplest of conversations and rudely slamming the door while I was asking him what time he wanted to be picked up.

I have not had the "pleasure" of meeting RMS but based on what I've read I'm not surprised.

I don't know the guy and I don't intend to make an effort. But sometimes it takes more than a first meeting to really know someone.

On the other hand, rude or not, I do respect the guy for what he did and continue to do.

Fettoosh, I agree with you but when someone slams a car door in your face while you are leaning over to try to talk to them....that first meeting is the only chance I'm taking to "know" them.

@Fettoosh,

> On the other hand, rude or not, I do respect the guy for what he did and continue to do.

Same for me too. There are too many less-accomplished commentators (even here) who are all-too-quick too condemn the guy for his strong and principled stances for FSF, while remaining mostly UNprincipled themselves.

2c

> I do respect the guy for what he did and continue to do.

I respect what he did and continues to do. And that reflects well on him. Is that enough to make me respect him? No.

Quoting:Is that enough to make me respect him? No.

It is a personal perspective but sound like throwing out the baby with the bath water.

@helios, is it fair to say Glenn Beck treated you better than Richard Stallman?

@ gus...it is more than fair, it is accurate.

Ah Ken, there you go, measuring RMS by the standards applied to mere humans.

"measuring RMS by the standards applied to mere humans."

Chortle

Well, he *is* a Doctor.