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