Re: non-free packages should document/advise about alternatives
On Mon, 18 Jan 1999 Kristoffer.Rose@ENS-Lyon.FR wrote:
>
> Now Corel would want to follow the Debian Policy out of respect for Debian,
> naturally, but also because if they do they know that their non-free
> package will remain functional even if a new version of Debian is released.
>
> At this point they read that the Corel wp.deb description file must propose
> free alternatives to WordPerfect ... rather silly, right?
On the contrary, Corel simply ignore this point of policy.
Policy is for *us* to follow. Third-party developers are *encouraged* to
follow policy, but not required. Since this particular point might annoy
them, they don't follow it. Fine by me.
Jules
/----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\
| Jelibean aka | jules@jellybean.co.uk | 6 Evelyn Rd |
| Jules aka | jules@debian.org | Richmond, Surrey |
| Julian Bean | jmlb2@hermes.cam.ac.uk | TW9 2TF *UK* |
+----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+
| War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. |
| When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. |
\----------------------------------------------------------------------/
Reply to: