Re: Another Non-Free Proposal
On 2004-01-09 03:05:23 +0000 Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au>
wrote:
If nonfree.org *will* happen, then the hypothetical benefits to our
users
due to more work happening on free software because of the lack of
non-free
software aren't going to come to pass.
I don't think that conclusion follows.
And by contrast, if you want nonfree.org *not* to happen -- [...]
Forseeing that it will happen can be consistent with wanting it not to
happen.
The arguments you and others are making here just aren't consistent.
I make no attempt to be consistent with the arguments of others.
"M" is large, "X" is trivial by comparison. The difference between
"M" and
"N" doesn't seem particularly great, and "N" seems consequently much
larger
than "X". [...]
X (non-free for debian) may be trivial compared to M (main for
debian), but I am not convinced that M and N (non-free outside debian)
necessarily need be similar size.
at the very least that the costs are significant and definite, and
the gains are insubstantial and hypothetical.
I disagree that the costs are definite: so far, it's nearly all
hypothetical. That said, I think this is where we differ
fundamentally. It may be because you are looking at the effect
globally or on yourself instead of on the project, in a shorter term,
or some other way.
It's entirely possible to prove me wrong here, if that's actually the
case: do the experiment and measure the time and effort it takes.
It seems that there are insufficient resources interested in this
experiment to do it, but that does not really indicate that there
would not be sufficient resources interested to do it for real.
--
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
Please http://remember.to/edit_messages on lists to be sure I read
http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ gopher://g.towers.org.uk/ slef@jabber.at
Creative copyleft computing services via http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
Reply to: