Re: Non-Constitutional Voting Procedure
- To: John Goerzen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Cc: Joseph Carter <email@example.com>, Seth Arnold <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "Ean R . Schuessler" <email@example.com>, Mark Brown <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- Subject: Re: Non-Constitutional Voting Procedure
- From: Sven LUTHER <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 11:51:19 +0200
- Message-id: <20001013115119.A32584@lambda.u-strasbg.fr>
- Mail-followup-to: Sven LUTHER <email@example.com>, John Goerzen <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Joseph Carter <email@example.com>, Seth Arnold <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "Ean R . Schuessler" <email@example.com>, Mark Brown <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- Reply-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>; from firstname.lastname@example.org on Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 10:48:12AM -0500
- References: <E13cbTo-0007B9-00@darren> <email@example.com> <20000927215140.L25312@sarge.private.brainfood.com> <20000928184127.B5229@tardis.ed.ac.uk> <20000928141844.M25312@sarge.private.brainfood.com> <20000928125202.A10011@willamette.edu> <20000929032448.B6763@debian.org> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 10:48:12AM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> Joseph Carter <email@example.com> writes:
> > Without regard to constitutionality, I believe there are technical reasons
> > why non-free should remain a little while longer. Netscape is the biggest
> > of them at the moment since currently Mozilla is not ready to replace it.
> So use an installer package. We have one now, and it can go into
> contrib. Note that my GR does not require the removal of contrib.
Would apt-getting the installer package download and install the netscape
anyway, what you propose is not invading our home house, but in a certain way,
it would become more and more difficult to update said package.
I think i agree with you in principle, but what do you propose to do with the
non-free packages ? just remove them from debian disks ?
I think there was a proposal to create non-free.debian.org or something such
to house them. This would not need to be as extensively mirrored as what is
now, but it's presence would make lot of people more happy with you proposals
Also what of the debian developper who maintain non-free packages ?
What will happen to them, would they still be able to use the BTS for their
packages ? Or should they make provision for having their own apt-gettable
repository for people to download. I think not everyone has the ressources to
If that will happen, the non-free packages will not have the guarantee of
quality that they have now, and this will result in people downloading
non-free packages from who knows where and may causes bugs, security problems,
name space clashes, policy violation, etc ...
This are all questions that need to be answered before voting stuff bit by
bit like things are done now.