Re: stability of non-free?

["Brian C. White" <bcwhite@verisim.com>]

> >    We definitely have to do something regarding this problem.
> >    I think that non-free is definitely part of the Debian system, and favors option 1 (free/non-free inside the debian stable/unstable hierarchy).
> >    What do you think ?
>
> I disagree. The whole purpose of non-free is to divorce those packages
> from the distribution. Non-free has nothing to do with stable vs unstable.
> It has to do with the distribution restrictions that are placed on the
> packages that it contains.

I agree (with the disagreement).  Personally, I'd prefer to roll _all_
packages into the main distribution, but barring that I like having them
all collected in a single place.  Adding more directory levels will
just make things more confusing for the end user who is, I might add,
the most important person.
                                             
                                          Brian
                                 ( bcwhite@verisim.com )
                                             
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     It's not the days in your life, but the life in your days that counts.


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com