From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans Reiser Subject: Re: Fwd: reiser4 non-free? Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 10:35:12 -0700 Message-ID: <409682D0.10705@namesys.com> References: <20040424193246.GA2490@raptus.homelinux.org> <4091DAFE.5030809@namesys.com> <20040430055619.GD7487@archimedes.ucr.edu> <40923D1C.3090003@namesys.com> <20040430174343.GE7487@archimedes.ucr.edu> <409561EE.7030000@namesys.com> <20040502215500.GB18235@xieana.donarmstrong.com> <20040503065830.GS29226@nysv.org> <40967D41.705@namesys.com> <20040503172146.GV29226@nysv.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <20040503172146.GV29226@nysv.org> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-9"; format="flowed" To: =?UTF-8?B?TWFya3VzIFTDtnJucXZpc3Q=?= Cc: debian-legal@lists.debian.org, reiserfs-list@namesys.com Markus T=C3=B6rnqvist wrote: >On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 10:11:29AM -0700, Hans Reiser wrote: > > =20 > >>>Credits unread are credits unknown. >>> =20 >>> >>The problem is not the end user, the problem is that distros do it=20 >>without the end user ever knowing that there was something to turn off. >> =20 >> > >Mayhaps. But it's never that easy. > >Debian could quite easily have a preinstall screen with all the credits, >but that would have to replace the mandatory showing of the credits. >That's, as far as I'd guess, not an option, because the credits would be >removed. > =20 > No, that certainly is an option. Relocating the credits to somewhere=20 reasonable for a particular installer is just fine with me. >The credits could also go to /dev/null with a preinstall screen, but that >would not fix the non-free issue. > >Also, if every software showed their credits, there would easily be a ton >of them. > This is bad why? They could be interesting for users to read while the=20 install proceeds. > But many modules do show some credits when inserted. > >I don't know, I don't have an answer to this. > >Except that I think it's absurd that someone would knowingly and willingly >even want to suppress credits if they're put there. Especially in a case >where the developer has tried to minimize them. > =20 > It is absurd, but it is reality. >That's still not an answer, though. > > =20 > >>There is nothing offensive about them. We reduced them to a random=20 >>credit, rather than an exhaustive credit like they were. Now users=20 >>might actually take the time to read them.;-) >> =20 >> > >Problem is, might be as in my case, that I don't remember them... >But when information is spewed on my screen, I tend to read it, but how >much is a credit unremembered worth? > =20 > Well, hey, making the credits memorable is up to us, and if we fail we fail. >Why is it so difficult to try to argue both sides, because both sides have >good points? > >What if Debian just accepted that a clause forbidding removal of credits >set by the copyright holder is not limiting freedom? > >I mean, it's not THAT major an issue. If people think the credits suck, >they'll stick them up their /dev/null. So it's in the best interest of the >developer to make sure they don't annoy anyone. And people should have the >right to be credited fairly for their work if they want to. > > =20 > Thanks for understanding.