On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 11:33:56PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 06:11:43PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > Is all of the stuff in non-free too weak to survive on its own merits? > > Does it *deserve* our charity? > > Whose charity? We already have the infrastructure to support it. Nobody > is required to work on a non-free package. If Joe Developer wants to > work on a non-free package, why would you care? Charity: 3. Liberality to the poor and the suffering, to benevolent institutions, or to worthy causes; generosity. [1913 Webster] 4. Whatever is bestowed gratuitously on the needy or suffering for their relief; alms; any act of kindness. [1913 Webster] Maintenance of the non-free section of the archive and of the packages within consume a non-zero quantity of resources. The Social Contract makes it clear that the packages outside of Debian main enjoy "second-class" status. They are not the primary focus of our efforts, but a diversion that was, in 1997 deemed to be worthwhile for the sake of utility to our users. Furthermore, I don't care if Joe Developer wants to work on a non-free package. Must he insist that the Debian Project be affiliated with that work? -- G. Branden Robinson | Kissing girls is a goodness. It is Debian GNU/Linux | a growing closer. It beats the branden@debian.org | hell out of card games. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Robert Heinlein
Attachment:
pgpa4VVkXAyXa.pgp
Description: PGP signature