Fedora not "free" enough for GNU?

[Conrad Meyer]

Quoth Gregory Maxwell:
> On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 7:48 PM, Conrad Meyer <konrad at tylerc.org> wrote:
> > Fedora will not include a blob free kernel though, unless upstream does it
> > (i.e. what dwmw2 was trying to help Alexandre Oliva with, despite being
> > insulted for trying to help).
> 
> Presumably fedora could offer an alternative kernel from a different
> upstream to meet this requirement?

No, it's been discussed before. Fedora won't ship another kernel.

> (An yes, Vasile, I'm aware of BLAG, but blag isn't just de-blobbed Fedora)
> 
> Fedora has a great branding ("Infinite Freedom" etc), it's unfortunate
> to see it diluted over this technically minor issue.   It may be moot,
> however, since blobs may not be the only blocker. (For example, as
> distributed, Firefox in Fedora is constantly nagging me to install
> Flash, and I don't think upstream is interested in changing that
> behaviour, and one of RMS's criteria in the past is that the OS should
> not make non-free software automatically available for install as
> though it were the same as free software)
> 
> Though I'm perhaps a bit confused by exactly how the rules with
> respect to following upstream are applied for cases like this, since
> are there not some packages which are perpetually patched to remove
> the MP3 codec, for example?

The MP3 codec is illegal to distribute in the states (where Redhat is), but 
free software. Flash on the other hand is free to distribute, but closed 
source.

Regards,
-- 
Conrad Meyer <konrad at tylerc.org>