Re: The "Free" vs. "Non-Free" issue
On Sat, Jan 03, 2004 at 07:34:17PM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > Why does there need to be anything else?
On Sat, Jan 03, 2004 at 04:48:49PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> > I'm looking, perhaps in vain, for some rationale behind what you've
> > been proposing.
On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 01:32:15AM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> I thought it was obvious. 'Answering the question "Does Debian, as a
> project, wish to discontinue support of non-free?"'.
You seem to be saying you're not trying to improve anything?
> > I certainly have restated the question. But I haven't *just* restated
> > it -- that restatement was a part of a question. That question, at its
> > crudest, is "What's the point?"
> The point of what? Supporting non-free? Not supporting it? Asking
> whether we want to support it? I'd have thought the point of all these
> were pretty obvious. I can think of several reasons for all of them
> off the top of my head.
> > > Your reponses to it, including this last one, have all simply said "I
> > > would vote [y], therefore I don't agree with removing it, so I don't
> > > think we should remove it". I think we got that part already. Please
> > > wait until the ballots go out before trying to vote :P
> > You seem to be saying that it's futile to even ask if there's any benefit
> > to be gained by dropping non-free.
> No, I'm saying that your argument is just circling endlessly around "I
> don't want to drop non-free", and pointing out that you should wait
> until the vote happens before trying to vote.
Ok. How about, instead, we talk about the reasons for this change:
what problems it solves, what it makes better, why it's a good idea?