On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 14:48 +0300, Nicu Buculei wrote: > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 04:24 -0400, Alan Cox wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 09:01:53AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > >>> Ask your neighbor, if he would pay USD600 for a barrel of "free beer". > >> I think you fundamentally miss the entire point of free software here. > > I don't think so. > > > > I simply decided not to contribute to software products, which are not > > freely (cost-free) available nor cost-freely redistributable and to > > brand them as "non-free". > > I tried to stay away from this flame but... I also can decide to call > "non-free" software that does not help me getting laid, how is that > relevant? This rationale contributes to me not to consider RHEL and CentOS, which is the rationale why I don't consider them to be replacements for a "Fedora LTS". Or differently: It doesn't matter what people sell as "free", it matters what people accept as "free". -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
