Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> 1) Any non-free .deb site could certainly restrict uploads to bona
> fide Debian developers.
Agreed, with considerable time and infrastructure resources.
> 2) That user's question is a very good one, and now it will get
> answered: "because the software isn't free software". And that's a
> very good thing for them to know.
Yes that is a simple answer to non-free packages. OTOH, this user's
concern was why a packge (that wasn't non-free) was not in the Debian
mirror. He believed if the software was safe and effective, it would
be downloaded from the Debian mirrors. If you truly believe every
package is non-free is either non-safe or non-effective, then you are
wise to back the GR.
OTOH, I find that I depend on packages in non-free which I do find
safe and effective and, to my thinking, do not lessen the importance
or ideals of free software. So, I'll vote against the GR.
--
Kevin Rosenberg | .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux **
http://b9.com/debian.html | : :' : The universal
GPG signed and encrypted | `. `' Operating System
messages accepted. | `- http://www.debian.org/
Attachment:
pgpVPiTCZWHHQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature