Re: General Resolution: Handling of the non-free section: proposedBallot
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 12:59:55PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> On 2004-03-08 12:31:05 +0000 Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>
> wrote:
>
> >On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 05:39:53PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> >>I think that it may encourage improved support for non-Debian-hosted
> >>packages in general, including project-produced packages and
> >>backport
> >>projects.
> >
> >And ? Is this a good thing, or a negative effect on the global amount
> >of
> >non-free sfotware in general ?
>
> A good thing. It means that more software gets packaged for debian and
> probably more people would use debian. I don't really care about
> negative effects on non-free software in general in this case. I
> support the Suffield drop GR to improve Debian, not to harm non-free.
You don't care about it, or you willingly close your eyes to it, in
order to achieve the short term goal of having debian no more distribute
the non-free section ?
> >This would mean, not having a relative small, and negatively viewed
> >non-free repository on the debian archive, but an officially
> >recognized
> >proliferation of third party non-free packages we have no control on.
>
> I want a proliferation of third-party free packages for debian. Third
> party non-free (like j2* packages) already exist and I doubt they
> would grow as quickly as free ones.
What about binary-only hardware drivers ? I wish you good luck to run
advanced 3D graphics on powerpc hardware for example, especially on
modern powerbooks.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: