On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 12:29:07PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 06:58:50AM +0000, Dr. Bas Wijnen wrote: > > Are you saying that a Debian system where only main is enabled is unsafe? > [...] > > If that is correct, it is a huge problem that that is the default setup > > we ship, don't you think? > It is, but solving it most likely means actually violating Debian > principles, You cannot be serious... You believe that if our rules say we should harm our users, the rules are more important than the users? Have you not read the social contract? Also, I'm interested to hear which rule would be broken if we make it the default to provide our users with updates that they need to be safe. If such a rule exists, I believe it should be changed (because our users are our priority, as per SC), but I'm not aware that we would break any of our rules. Please clarify. Also, as a reminder, I'm still waiting for anyone to answer the unrar-nonfree question: if the non-free part is split off and placed in the cloud, would the other part be allowed into main? In other words, would this be a way for the unrar-nonfree maintainer to get the package into Debian? And if not, why not? Thanks, Bas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature