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

Re: Draft new DFSG

>> "JH" == Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net> writes:

JH> No it's not. Here are a few reasons we may chose to keep a package out of
JH> debian even though it meets the dfsg:

JH> * because it is of very low quality, and there is already a far
JH> superior alternative that is also free
JH> * because it implements something inherently unsecure, or is
JH> written in such an insecure manner that fixing it would require a
JH> rewrite

In both cases, the developer packaging it (if he would at all) will
put them into experimental.

JH> * because it is 5 gb in size and will only be used by a few
JH> hundred people on earth.

I am not sure what to do about this (although this is rather
academic). But it would still not justify the change proposed. IMHO.

I am sure someone else has a good idea how to handle such a thing.


Reply to: