On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 20:29 -0400, Gerald Henriksen wrote:
On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 13:03:51 -0700, you wrote:
>On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 15:50 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>> On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 14:52 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
>> > This is definitely scope creeping the discussion here, but I'm coming
>> > round to the viewpoint that Fedora shoudn't ship any application in
>> > the default install whose primary purpose is to connect to proprietary
>> > web services, or at least not ones configured by default to do so.
>> > (All apps are of course free to be in the repositories).
>> > This would dovetail nicely with making it not suck to install applications.
>> I don't think this is a useful direction to take the F14/pino problem
>> into. If we stop installing applications that are useful for users, then
>> the users will go somewhere else.
>This is the same argument you can make with proprietary hardware
>drivers. Ultimately we've always agreed with the FSF position that
>encouraging the use of proprietary software just makes it less likely
>that free software will be written, so we shouldn't do it.
>The situation here is exactly analogous. If we choose to, say, ship a
>client configured to connect to identi.ca by default instead, we're
>putting our weight behind freedom in a very important area, just as
>important as hardware support.
Pino does not connect to anything be default, you need an account in
order to connect to either twitter or identi.ca with a dedicated
client like pino.
In that case, IMHO, it's fine.
The bigger question this brings up is where does Fedora draw the
Yeah, indeed. There's a big fuzzy area.
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org