Is Ubuntu commited to free software?

[Dmitrijs Ledkovs]

On 9 June 2010 17:57, Danny Piccirillo <danny.piccirillo at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> Of course it is! At least according to our
> philosophy: http://www.ubuntu.com/project/about-ubuntu/our-philosophy
>
> Still, many people don't think that Ubuntu is truly committed to free
> software in practice. These people can and should be our allies. Their
> concerns are valid, and they are not difficult to appease. I'd like to
> present a short list of simple ways that Ubuntu could show it's commitment:
> 1. Offer ways to easily purge all non-free software from one's system.

Those who know why medibuntu, restricted & multiverse exists also know
how to remove those and purge those packages.

I personally have only one firmware blob for my webcam support,
non-free codecs, flash & skype.

>  * This would require supporting the linux libre kernel (it doesn't have to
> be by default, but the option should be available)
> 2. Make a point of saying why and how non-free software was bad, but also
> why the option is given to install it


Define "bad" ?! It's a very subjective matter with many personal views
on the subject. I for example believe that Microsoft Office suite is a
high quality software designed with very high standards and great user
experience. License terms does not make software better or worse, it
just limits the amount of people who will agree to use it and limits
what is and isn't allowed to do when you are using it.

>  * This would need to be shown every time Ubuntu recommends proprietary
> software like restricted drivers
> That's it!

Personally I do not want my desktop to nag and change my personal
views and making me feel bad for making a particular choice of the
installed software.

Ubuntu is about freedom, and that includes freedom of choice. We do
have predefined-seeds targeting different users with what we believe
is best experience for them, but in no way we will ever limit user's
freedom of choice or try to manipulate it. From defining apt
components, adding/removing ppa's, pinning and blacklisting packages
users have the ultimate control of what they feel comfortable with
running on their machines.

There are many software packages out there, and there are many
alternative packages with similar functionality but written in
different languages / with different license and we are offering the
most we can collectively possibly maintain / support.

Some thing gpl is evil, some thing bsd is evil, i don't think EULA's
and apple public license are evil. I respect all developers' choices
and as a user I make my own whether I want to use particular package
or not.