On Thu, 2009-05-21 at 20:12 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 11:09:18AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Thu, 2009-05-21 at 13:25 -0400, Christopher Beland wrote: > > > Based on the recent conversations on this list, I have updated: > > > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Flash > > > > > As the page is generically named, and Fedora is a project with a strong > > emphasis on F/OSS, I would suggest the page should more prominently > > discuss and advocate F/OSS alternatives (gnash and swfdec) and position > > the Adobe plugin as a fallback for cases where those solutions are not > > sufficient. Also, it should refer more specifically to the Adobe plugin > > when saying things like "Flash is Non-Free Software". WDYT? > > I added a top-side admonition, taking the text directly from our > existing [[ForbiddenItems]] page. We should maintain equivalency > between those pages. (I would have liked to transclude just that > section, but didn't know how.) > > Because, at least, (1) the use of Adobe's plugin is not illegal > anywhere to our knowledge, and (2) the use of Adobe's software > repository does not, as far as we know, present problems of potential > contributory infringement, this page is permissible. I agree we need > an admonition to clarify this is an *alternative* to FOSS, not a > method of first resort for people who care about software freedom. I think the page now looks great and appropriately commented. I would, however, challenge you in your statement / implication that people who would use a proprietary plugin like Adobe Flash on Fedora - even as a first resort - somehow do not care about software freedom. That's a very strong and IMO misguided statement to make ideologically about some very active members of the Fedora community, including me. I would submit that the vast majority of people using Fedora today DO care about software freedom and would prefer to see something like Adobe's plugin released under a GPL (or like) license. But they also still need to get work done right now. And unless / until Adobe licenses their code, or gnash and swfdec mature to the point they are reasonable substitutes for most use cases (it could happen), the non-Free Adobe plugin and its current licensing terms are a practical compromise. I really hope you didn't mean what you wrote in the context in which it appears. -- ====================== "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
