Web lists-archives.com

Re: Whether remotely running software is considered "software" for Debian.

On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 04:00:54PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 10:20:27AM +0000, Dr. Bas Wijnen wrote:
> > Let me put it differently then: for me, one of the major benefits of Debian
> > over (most of) our derivatives is that I can set the system up in a way that
> > allows me to live in a free software bubble.  
> So you don't update the non-free software in your CPU?

I suppose so.  Are you saying that a Debian system where only main is enabled
is unsafe?  If that is correct, it is a huge problem that that is the default
setup we ship, don't you think?

> > No free implementation: That's what this discussion is all about.  For all the
> > real examples that have been mentioned in this thread (amazon s3, icq), someone
> > has noted that there actually is a free implementation of the server software.
> Did anyone realy mention a free implementation of the ICQ server?

Yes, I believe so.  I don't care enough to look it up, as it isn't all that
relevant to the discussion.

> > Which as far as I understand means everybody agrees (I know I do) that that is
> > enough to allow the package in main.
> No, we happily had s3cmd in main even before someone found a free server
> implementation. 

I did not contradict that.  My statement is that if there is a free
implementation, it is certainly good enough.  The situation without a free
server is obviously not as clear.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature