[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [gNewSense-users] more on firefox and one possible fix]

From: oddmund
Subject: Re: [gNewSense-users] more on firefox and one possible fix]
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 19:44:23 +0100 (CET)
User-agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.5

Andrew Wigglesworth a écrit:

> Both Debian and Ubuntu distribute non-free software, and I'm not
interested in a
> bunfight between factions of Debian and Ubuntu users.  The parts of
> Ubuntu that are used ARE Free Software and ARE well supported with security
> patches etc by Ubuntu.

There is obviously still a problem with the Mozilla trademarks. The Debian
Project came up with a free solution. Ubuntu/Canonical made an
'arrangement' with the Mozilla Foundation. If you don't see the difference
between the Debian Project and Ubuntu/Canonical, you have a problem. Read
Shuttleworth's blog <> and other writings and you
will probably find out what it is about.

> Would you have started with Debian Sarge (you know, XFree86 4.3 etc)
that was already over a year old (and feature frozen well before that)
in July 2006?

Why not? I have been using Debian GNU/Linux since 1998 and it worked very
well for me most of the time. Debian is very stable, but it is not as
static as you seem to believe. There is an enormous space between Hamm and
Etch, even the upgrade from Sarge to Etch is quite a jump. Debian is
mature and continue to progress. The Mozilla case is partly resolved and
will be finished with the upcoming stable release (Etch). Firmwares and
other non-free material will most likely be moved out of main quite soon
(by next upgrade, I hope).

> I don't think we should use gNS itself as a weapon in the internal
disputes in other
> GNU/Linux distributions, it would bring us ill will for no real gain.

Why would you mention gNewSense elsewhere? Who are talking about weapons?
This is not a war. I made some comments about the Firefox affair trying to
illustrate the problem being linked to Ubuntu. I don't think this
relationship was a reasonable choice, but the gNewSense maintainers do
what they want and follow their path of course.

> The very existence of gNS and it's firm stance on Free Software is enough.

Yes and no. The creation of a new distribution is a process. Everything is
not perfect in the beginning, but nothing is static either, or shouldn't
be. That is why discussion is so important. Once again the Debian Project
is an example. Where would it have been without all the discussions during
all these years? There would not be any Debian community and no
Debian-derivatives either. If you close the doors and avoid discussions
about the platform, the very basis, you will not survive. Announcing a
100% free GNU/Linux distribution is not enough and not necessarily
convincing if it is not completely true, or because the initial platform
makes it complicated to maintain this goal.

> We need to increase the technical abilities of our community, create our
> own documentation and many other things, not be diverted into fruitless
> arguments over which is the prettiest shade of grey.

It is not at all about shades and prettiness. If you want to create a
community, you must exchange ideas. If not, you decide for yourself, but
then you will also have to do the work for yourself. There is no conflict
between discussion and work. 'Diversion' is mainly a force enabling you to
go forward. Do you know any community without disagreements, 'diversion'?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]