Re: General Resolution: Removing non-free
>>"Branden" == Branden Robinson <branden@ecn.purdue.edu> writes:
Branden> [NO NEED TO CC ME ON LIST MAIL]
Branden> On Wed, Jun 07, 2000 at 03:27:35PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
>> non-free software doesn't need to be discriminated against (and changing
>> the rules & practices relating to non-free software after 4+ years is
>> discrimination), ignoring it is sufficient.
Branden> That's almost exactly what this proposal aims to do. As it
Branden> stands we pay a contribute a significant portion of our
Branden> resources to the upkeep of non-free software.
we pay a contribute a significant?
Please, let the maintainers of the non-free stuff be the only
ones who spend time on this; the rest of us can just ignore that
bit. I would certainly say that non-free software should not feature
in releases, not caoulkt it have RC bugs, since it is not part of our
distribution, and this is not released.
Or are you taling about disk and bandwidth issues? non-free is
really dwarfed by the main distribution; and the added burdens are,
IMHO, more than offset by the added value they bring to Debian (yes,
non free software can have value)
manoj
--
"One man's mate is another man's passion." Jeff Daiell's description
of adultery
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: