Re: General Resolution: Removing non-free

[brian moore <bem@cmc.net>]

On Wed, Jun 07, 2000 at 10:21:21AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> 	Which brings up an interesting concern, without a central repository
> allowing for easier dependancy tracking and maintenance we may end up with a
> large number of packages just floating around.  I realize we aren't around to
> gather up users, but I don't know that intentionally making things harder
> for them (And perhaps not actually doing much productive at the same time) is
> useful.

And if you think such chaos is a good thing, run Redhat for a couple
months.  ("Ack, I need to install libfoo1.2 for the bar package, but
baz wants libfoo1.1 so it will be removed unless I can find a newer
version of baz that doesn't break some other dependency.")

The above situation was what pissed me off enough one day to format a
machine that came with RH preinstalled.  (I'd been a slackboy until then,
but ruled out slack when they got silly with glibc and their version
numbering...)

Please, please: the size and depth of the Debian archives are one of the
best features it has.  A consistent view of the 'software universe'
(including non-free) is a Good Thing.  Encouraging monstrosities like
rpmfind.net (neato, "debfind.net" is available...) is bad for Debian.

If you want to discourage the use of nonfree software, that is certainly
an admirable thing, but there are better ways.  A simple one, which I
love, is "vrms".  Perhaps a new field in the control (for non-free
especially, but perhaps useful for others) like "Suggested-Replacement"
for a "this package provides a suitable alternative" package.

I would be saddened to see things like mpg123 (which would be probably be
Free if the patent issues were not there) or even blender (which may end up
Free, keep your fingers crossed :)) removed.  Heck, even things like
povray would be yanked.  Read the povray license -- while I agree it's
non-free, the license is a 1977 attempt at the same thing the Artistic
License tries to do.  I think more could be gained from encouraging
people to change their licenses to one of the 'standards' (ie GPL,
LGPL, Aristic, BSD) as they see fit for their circumstances than by
shunning them.

-- 
Brian Moore                       | Of course vi is God's editor.
      Sysadmin, C/Perl Hacker     | If He used Emacs, He'd still be waiting
      Usenet Vandal               |  for it to load on the seventh day.
      Netscum, Bane of Elves.