>>> Richard Stallman 7-Jan-08 17:14 >>>
quoted text
>
>     IMO, a big part of the problem here is that when you say "recommend" in
>     this context what you actually mean appears (based on the discussion
>     here) to be something that most people would express as "not
>     deliberately erect barriers against".
>
> The evidence of this discussion shows that's not a good description
> for what I am saying.  Many of the people on this list were told that
> I want OpenBSD to "erect barriers against" installing non-free
> programs.  And their words show that they think this means designing
> the system so that installing non-free programs is impossible.  (I
> have not suggested such a thing.)
>
> My usage of the "recommend" fits in normal usage.  If you include
> program FOO in a list of programs that could be installed, implicitly
> that recommends installing FOO as an option for people to consider.
>
> Perhaps "implicitly recommend" would be a clearer description of this
> particular case.

No, Richard, it would not.

Recommend means (and I quote the Concise Oxford Dictionary): "advise
course of action, treatment, person to do, that thing should be done".

We do not recommend that someone install any particular ports.

Think of the ports system as a set of recipes, of how to install other
people's software.

A particular person would not make everything from a recipe book: they
may be allergic to nuts, or not like mushrooms, or have a gluten
intollerance... if they do, the recipe book does not force them to
make that meal, there is no reason why the existence of a wheat-based
recipe would stop a celiac suffer from buying the book.

Some of the programs that ports enables users to install are not free.
Some are appallingly written.

We make no claims about software for which ports exist (a frequently
asked queston on this list is whether they are audited, the frequently-
given answer is, of course, "no".)

We do not recommend any ports.  OpenBSD is a complete operating
system, with enough components to suit many people with requiring ports.
The ports system provides choice, and options for people.  Nothing is
recommended.  To be clear: each port is a recipe that says "at least
one person has found that [...] (set of instructions) will enable you
to install this third-party software on OpenBSD".

If ports were recommendations, why would there be so many editors, or
so many web browsers?  The ports system is about choice, not about
recommendations (or otherwise) from OpenBSD developers.  Maybe if there
were 20 ports they would be recommendations, but there are over 4,500
ports.  We do not make recommendations about any of these.

In fact, our only claim w.r.t. ports is that the licences for the
software allow us to distributes the ports (and packages, where made).
And where licences have been unclear we have removed ports from the system.

Please now stop this

Thanks

Tom