Re: General Resolution: Handling of the non-free section: proposedBallot
MJ Ray <mjr@dsl.pipex.com> schrieb:
> On 2004-03-04 11:46:14 +0000 Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org> wrote:
>
>> That's an old argument, and it's not going to be more true just
>> because it is repeated. Most users _can_ make the difference between
>> Debian and non-free.
>
> If it's so old, do we have any good numbers on it, or are both views
> just wind?
No numbers. Personally, I didn't realize the difference in the first
place, only when it was mentioned in some discussion in
debian-user-german (which was quite early in my personal "Debian
history"). But from then on, I think it was clear to me.
I will vote for keeping the non-free infrastructure. However, I think it
would be a good idea to move non-free from all "standard places" in
documentation to a separate chapter. This includes, most importantly,
all boilerplate lines for sources list.
If we suggest users to use
deb ftp://ftp.$country.debian.org/debian woody main non-free contrib
in our basic docs (and even in the installer-generated sources.list,
IIRC), we need not be surprised if users don't see the difference.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel
Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie
Reply to: