On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> You're fine with one level of injustice. I'm fine with another level of >> injustice. Both compromise the freedoms that Fedora currently gives you. > > I'm not fine with it. It's an unfortunate situation too. But producing > a single special case trivial display program for users who couldn't > run anything which was truly free at all is hardly comparable to > cryptographically locking down the core of an OS— millions of lines of > code written by other people, and missing an opportunity to help users Apologies for the double response— but it occurs to me that this may not be clear: My initial take— and still my preference— is to not participate at all: Any participation legitimizes this imposition, regardless of how I feel about the software freedom of a help-display ship. But people have provided excellent arguments that the silent failure would be especially confusing and disruptive to users. I agree with these concerns, so I offered the idea of a help shim which would completely address those specific problems while still preserving 99.99999999% of user software freedom and while still being pretty similar to complete non-participation. I think it is poor form hold an effort to compromise and find something that will be acceptable to people who are primarily concerned with usability against me, or to suggest that I can't argue that software freedom is important because I'm unwilling to stoop to whatever fringe ethics you'd like me to uphold. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
