Re: Removing non-free - reality check.
On Sat, 10 Jun 2000, Adam McKenna wrote:
> However, the proponents of this measure are not looking to compromise -- they
> have been given several opportunities so far and haven't taken anyone up on
> it.
That's because what we have now is already the compromise between the
free/non-free that was decided upon many years ago. Anything further is
not really a compromise anymore :|
It seems we have lost the balance that we had when this arragement was set
upon, I guess we've managed to alienate too many of the people who want to
make a really high quality distribution at any cost and have brought on
too many people who want to have DFSG purity at any cost.
Oddly, I remember a time when it seemed both groups could operate
reasonably together (aside from that little KDE thing) Now it seems one
group wants to force the other out :<
Jason
Reply to: