Re: [Fsfe-uk] Clarification needed

[Alex Hudson]

On Mon, 2002-03-25 at 17:16, Nick Veitch wrote:
> With reference to this and to some of the other suggestions and comments that
> have appeared on this list, why then so cagey in relation to IBM/Red Hat/
> Mandrake/ SuSE/ Whoever?

Such as? I've tried to search the archive (well, through google.. ;) for
comments about all those organisations you mention, and I can't really
see anything (search for IBM, for example, only really turns up Richard
Ibbotson talking about the Sheffield conference). Have you anything
particular in mind?

In terms of RedHat/Mandrake, I don't really remember much being said
about them - to be honest, the only bad stuff I hear about them is
generally from Debian users. Okay, they do distribute non-free software,
but I can't think of any that they actively develop (anyone?) and
certainly in the spectrum of GNU/Linux distributions they're among the
most-free. 

In terms of SuSE, I suppose that's the easiest target. Yep, SuSE hire a
lot of good programmers, and those programmers work on various key Free
Software projects (viz. Dave Jones). But, they don't produce a Free
GNU/Linux distribution. You can't make copies of SuSE Linux for your
friends. In fact, I don't think you can even get installable evaluation
editions anymore. Why should we support companies who only produce
proprietary software? 

I guess it comes down to being Free, non-Free, or "pragmatic". Some
people believe Free Software can co-exist with proprietary software;
some don't. 

> >We have the beginnings of our explanation on:
> >http://www.affs.org.uk/faq.html
> 
> which is partially broken ( FAQ page references to non-existant css files)...
> perhaps this page should also include some relevant contact info, at least for
> the webmaster.

Wilko. That's me, btw ;) Thanks to the other people sending me comments
too - Brian has been particularly active recently :) 

Cheers,

Alex.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part