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

Re: Discussion - non-free software removal



On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 10:28:37PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >>"Branden" == Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org> writes:
> 
>  Branden> On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 11:13:12AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>  >> In the long term, non-fre would wither on its own accord, as
>  >> free software continues to make inroads into the mainstream, and we
>  >> would be at the same spot without making people who like free
>  >> software but must use non-free software jump through hoops. 
> 
>  Branden> How far must it wither before we decide it's not longer useful?  To
>  Branden> zero?
> 
> 	When it is empty? ;-)
> 
> 	But really, do we need to make such a determination, if
>  non-free is indeed slowly dying?

So you have changed your mind that user confusion about what is and is
not part of "Debian" imposes a cost upon us?  Or do you feel that the
utility of even one package in non-free, no matter what it is, is a
benefit that outweighs that cost?

>  Branden> Why don't we let our BTS be used for tracking issues with Microsoft
>  Branden> Office, as I understand that there is no such publicly-available
>  Branden> resource?
> 
> 	I think MS lawyers shall object. Espescially if we leave the
>  BTS open to anyone to lok at the flaws recorded.

Is that the only type of limitation we should accept on usage of the
BTS?

-- 
G. Branden Robinson                |    Damnit, we're all going to die;
Debian GNU/Linux                   |    let's die doing something *useful*!
branden@debian.org                 |    -- Hal Clement, on comments that
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |       space exploration is dangerous

Attachment: pgpbyCaTpS477.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: