On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 14:48 +0300, Nicu Buculei wrote:
  

Ralf Corsepius wrote:
    

On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 04:24 -0400, Alan Cox wrote:
      

On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 09:01:53AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
        

Ask your neighbor, if he would pay USD600 for a barrel of "free beer".
          

I think you fundamentally miss the entire point of free software here.
        

I don't think so. 

I simply decided not to contribute to software products, which are not
freely (cost-free) available nor cost-freely redistributable and to
brand them as "non-free".
      

I tried to stay away from this flame but... I also can decide to call 
"non-free" software that does not help me getting laid, how is that 
relevant?
    

This rationale contributes to me not to consider RHEL and CentOS, which
is the rationale why I don't consider them to be replacements for a
"Fedora LTS".

Or differently: It doesn't matter what people sell as "free", it matters
what people accept as "free".