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

Re: General Resolution: Removing non-free



Branden Robinson wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2000 at 09:27:54AM -0500, Keith G. Murphy wrote:
> > Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > This resolution will do NOTHING to prevent users from downloading, using,
> > > compiling from source (if available), modifying, etc. non-free software.
> > >
> > > It is a largely technical proposal with some alterations to the Social
> > > Contract to clear up some muddy language and terminate a compromise that
> > > was made years ago for pragmatic reasons.
> > >
> > Huh?
> >
> > "We will support our users who develop and run non-free software on
> >   Debian, but we will neither make the system depend upon nor distribute
> >   an item of non-free software.  Debian may continue to distribute
> >   non-free software previously distributed via its FTP site prior to the
> >   woody distribution."
> >
> > I read that to mean that no new non-free packages will appear on
> > Debian's FTP site.  For instance, newer versions of NS Communicator will
> > not be available there as deb's.  Not to mention the JDK.
> 
> Correct.
> 
> > Either I'm mistaken, or your statement is highly disingenuous.  It
> > *would* effectively prevent me from downloading non-free software in the
> > way I would like: as debs, from the Debian site, using apt.
> 
> A false alternative.  What is wrong with downloading software, as debs,
> from some site on the site, using apt?

Huh?  "site on the site"?  Do you mean a non-Debian site?  Nothing, as
long as the infrastructure is created to do that.  Hopefully, it will
be.  It's sure going to make the distro harder to use, mainly for new
folks.  "Oh, you want *that*, all you have to do is change your
'etc/sources.list' file to point to www.fishbros.com/~joeschmo/debian. 
Oh, that other is over at ftp.bfegypt.com/~atowns/debian.  Yeah, used to
be maintained right on the Debian site; those were the days..."

> 
> > Speaking as a non-Debian-developer, I think maybe this is all simply
> > premature, considering NS and JDK in particular.  There are probably
> > others.  Couldn't we get the browser and JDK nailed down first?  (Pardon
> > me if I am mistaken about the JDK; I'm going from the remarks of
> > others).
> 
> There will always be non-free software.  Will there always be a non-free
> section?  Will we always need one?  Do we really need one now?  Is it
> possible for users to get their non-free software needs met through
> non-official-Debian sources while still using the Debian operating system?
>
Possible != easy.  Possible != practical.  Possible != will happen.
 
> > If this is put into effect, I really would have to reconsider my choice
> > of distributions.  *Very* regretfully.  :-(
> 
> Well, I would hope you would not make your decision until you had seen and
> studied the real consequences, instead of the falling-sky scenarios that
> some opponents of the GR are positing.
> 
You have confirmed my prior view of what the real consequences would
be.  :-(

But thanks for the straight talk anyway.



Reply to: