also sprach Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> [2009.11.18.2201 +0100]: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 05:09:56PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > > Yes, the security FAQ addresses the non-free issue. This doesn't > > make the situation any more desirable. At least not for me. > > But that's not what you expressed in your mail, which could have > been (and probably was) taken as an authoritative statement on > behalf of the project. Those who disagree can make similarly "authoritative" statements in the opposite direction. Paul's e-mail says everything I wanted to say, and more, and better: http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2009/11/msg00049.html The only addition is that you cannot really backport packages from unstable. But that's something that could be addressed on a per-package exceptional basis. -- .''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o> Related projects: : :' : proud Debian developer http://debiansystem.info `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck http://vcs-pkg.org `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems "women who want to be equal to men lack ambition." -- timothy leary
Attachment:
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)