<snip> > Nothing at all. So, no, the "proprietary" label is not enough. > > That label is there AFTER you have been pushed through the gated enable 3rd > party software > setup, > which is mean to include in dept information about free software and > Fedora's mission. I'm not concerned about the gating. I agree that asking the same question again and again inhibits usability. As Michael pointed out in his e-mail, better wording could give more visibility to Free software and the community's mission than the current text. > So my point was that even after you been educated on the issue through that > gating process > there is some subliminal messaging around it. Well, it should really be more than subliminal messaging even at that point. :) For example, instead of framing all of this in terms of "proprietary" software, can we frame it in terms of "non free"/"non free and not open source" software? Would that require a review from a legal perspective? I ask because even though the two terms are synonymous, "non free" (to me) says more than that the software is proprietary. It also says that there is something called "free software", and that gives me more information to a user in an educational sense. Would something like this be doable? -- Thanks, Regards, Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ test mailing list -- test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to test-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
