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

Re: Flame against non-free burning, time to think.



On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 08:48:40PM -0500, Jim Penny wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 08:03:53PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > It hasn't so far.  We have added packages to non-free faster than we've
> > been getting rid of them.[1]
> Anthony>         total   main  contrib non-free   %main  %contrib %non-free
> Anthony> bo       1188    980    31      115       82.5    2.6    9.7
> Anthony> hamm     1852   1524   101      227       82.3    5.5   12.3
> Anthony> slink    2664   2269    97      298       85.2    3.6   11.2
> Anthony> potato   4305   3889   123      293       90.3    2.9    6.8
> Anthony> woody    8766   8291   203      272       94.6    2.3    3.1
> Anthony> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Anthony> sarge   10283   9734   257      292       94.7    2.5    2.8
> Anthony> sid     11168  10555   306      307       94.5    2.7    2.7
> 
> Odd.  I would say 
> 1)  it has been essentially unchanged since slink.

Well, if one wants to redefine "grown" as "essentally unchanged", yes.

> 2)  it has slowly been trending down.  (with a bubble up in sid)

115 < 227 < 298 < 307

Packages that were unreleasable presumably weren't counted in the
distribution release totals.  That the number of non-free packages in
unstable is larger than the number of non-free packages in any release
is instructive.

> 3)  it is clearly diminishing in relation to total packages.

...which does not suggest that it is going to dwindle to zero on its own
accord, as many defenders of the status quo have asserted.

Do you want to propose that it would safe to dump all of non-free once
it is has become a sufficiently small percentage of the total number of
packages that Debian ships?  That, at least, would be an objectively
measurable way of resolving this issue.

Clearly, 2.7% is too high a threshhold for some.  How small shall the
propotion get before we're not screwing our users by dumping non-free?
2.5%?  2.0%  1.5%?  1.0% 0.001%?

> I would have thought that these measurements would put the "non-free is 
> growing explosively to the ruination of Debian" argument.  

I haven't see anyone make this argument.  Have you a cite?

-- 
G. Branden Robinson                |    I am sorry, but what you have
Debian GNU/Linux                   |    mistaken for malicious intent is
branden@debian.org                 |    nothing more than sheer
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |    incompetence!     -- J. L. Rizzo II

Attachment: pgp90KIYxnEMm.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: