I'm heartily sick of this. I think I'm going to stop replying after the email below, but the third paragraph warrants a reply. I think this has shown what GBN-pragmatism is up against, sadly.
Alfred M. Szmidt ams@gnu.org
The packages that make up Debian MUST NOT recommend or depend upon non-free software (this is part of debian-policy s2.2.1). Saying otherwise is lying, plain and simple.
Now you are really deluding yourself. There are lots of packages that recommend and depend on non-free software in Debian, namley you have the whole non-free repository, and then you have contrib which is meant for software that depends on non-free software. Then you have packages in main that either depend or recommend non-free packages.
non-free and contrib are not part of Debian. Any packages in Debian which depend or recommend non-free are seriously buggy and will be fixed or removed.
I'll give you examples even, first thing that I found: krusader, clamav, file-roller, amavisd-new in main suggests lha from non-free.
None of that list depend on or recommend lha at this time. See footnote 1 for what they do depend on and recommend.
Before you start calling me a liar, I suggest you stop taking whatever drugs your doctor subscribed you.
How about I don't BECAUSE THEN I WOULD PROBABLY DIE SOONER. None of my drugs are mindbenders. Are yours? Seems like it! I am really disappointed that anyone on this list was insane enough to write that. It is this "you disagree, so go harm yourself" style of argument that gives FSF fans a bad name.
It is a lie that packages in Debian which depend on or recommend non-free, apart from bugs. If one doesn't want to be called a liar, one should not lie and defame friendly projects like that. You can try to make sure you're not lying by checking facts before sending messages. See whether what you're sending has any basis in reality, or is directly contradicted by it.
When debian finds non-free software in the distribution, it is promptly removed. No difference, but a double standard.
No, it gets put into another place, called non-free. It doesn't get removed. Non-free is part of Debian. You redefining that it isn't just so you can feel good about it is just sad.
Lie. I've not redefined it and it is removed from debian. Again, no evidence that debian was redefined. I remember one attempt to redefine it to be the project rather than the product, but that justly failed.
Previously, many debian developers were quite relaxed about people using Debian to mean the project, the machines or the developers, as well as the operating system. I think this sort of nonsense shows that was probably a mistake. It's damn messy putting this toothpaste back in the tube, and some FSF fans squeezing every chance they get is a big problem. Why don't they do something useful, like tell FSF to stop recommending "Konqueror, IE" for viewing on http://gplv3.fsf.org/comments/ ?
I guess this means that I should strongly support a cautious approach to which firms or products get labelled as GBN-approved, as I think some FSF fans are pretty unforgiving.
Best wishes,