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:
pgpHb7yHINJbA.pgp
Description: PGP signature