Is Ubuntu commited to free software?

[John King]

Sorry for top-posting; it's Android.

I don't think he has an issue with the governance of the kernel project per se; he's just presenting a fact. You can't really have a completely free Linux distro or install option, which is what he proposed, when the very kernel of the OS itself is non-free.

David Schlesinger <lefty at access-company.com> wrote:

>On 6/9/10 1:21 PM, "Danny Piccirillo" <danny.piccirillo at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>>
>> Upstream linux is not free. That is why LinuxLibre was created. 
>> 
>> http://libresoft.es/Members/herraiz/blog/linux-is-not-free-software
>> 
>> I have doubts that this was unintentional. Here's a list of nonfree stuff in
>> Linux: 
>> 
>> http://manulix.wikidot.com/kernel-blobs
>
>Danny, if you or anyone else has an issue with the governance of the kernel
>project, attempting to address it via an end-run through a "litmus test" of
>Ubuntu's support for "software freedom" seems a rather passive-aggressive
>way to go about it. I don't see much productive coming out of this
>discussion.
>
>If you're not happy with the way the kernel project is being run, I suggest
>you'd do better to go talk to Linus and Andrew Morton about it.
>
>If Ubuntu's governance is not to your liking, there are plenty of other
>distros. If none of those is to your liking, you can roll your own.
>
>
>-- 
>Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
>Ubuntu-devel-discuss at lists.ubuntu.com
>Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss