<html><body style="font-family: Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12px;">It was an interesting conversation for me to re-assess my opinion about FSFLA.<br><br>This will be my last msg in this thread.<br><br><blockquote class="atmailquote">>> Why instead of a patch to remove a non-free software you don't offer a <br>
>> patch to replace this non-free software with an free-software <br>
>> equivalent? :)<br><br>
>Because the later is not easy. No one has the capacity to do it. That is not a reason to make the user subjugated by the developer of the non-free software which has no >replacement.<br><br>I believe that there is confusion, either intentionally or not, when addressing this topic (on this thread and in others).<br><br>Giving the user options and the right information to make appropriate decisions is not subjugate the user to the developer.<br><br>But I believe that there is no willing to understand that. <br>And the very same people that talks about freedom (from a 4 freedoms perspective) wants the user to not be free to make their choices, to be imprisoned, forced to use outdated and insecure software (I am not talking about functionalities, I am talking about security) under the misconception of protect their freedom (even if in ANY distro they can still install non-free sw, just having to do a few more steps).<br><br>I understood your point of view and I assume that it is also the overall FSFLA point of view.<br><br>After 16 years of the same discussion, I thought that FSFLA had evolve (without having to go against its values).<br>I was wrong.<br><br>Thank you for bringing that to my attention.<br><br>Best regards,<br><br>Eder<br></blockquote></body></html>