[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Status of Debian Policy



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Sorry, I didn't explain well. I said:

*-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wonder why we are supporting this packages in the `contrib' section:

     * whose copyright permission notices (or patent problems) allow only
       distribution of compiled binaries (and thus of which only binaries
       are available)
     * allow free use only for a trial period (shareware)
     * are demonstration programs lacking vital functionality
       (crippleware)

Are there many of them?
*----------------------------------------------------------------------

I just meant: Why do we support these packages? (in *whatever* section).

> In "bo" we had 33 of contrib packages. The reason for this is that due to
> the lack of source we are not able to fix any bugs in that package or to
> adopt the package to our needs (cf. discussion of file locking).

Why do we want to have such packages in our FTP mirrors?
Do we really want to distribute crippleware?

I was talking about making contrib smaller, so that, by policy, some of
the packages that are now allowed could not be distributed in *any*
section at all.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: latin1

iQCVAgUBM6ZUbSqK7IlOjMLFAQHujAQAtOGMqhoC4hMcoMwn1xgthYukHMPLAOcy
1Udl8RjObgrngWoU8ZLzmVpe5KAxzyR8maXw5C38UXSrFKF+ywNo71L8z6DJnKVx
k+lBYE+XVQqwSrP6KzasRhhy40k9M3J2BeoXjMVkUUGbRCdtBAeBiCdPwwMyRX3o
ph5ieLMdIE8=
=uTrw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .


Reply to: