On Sat, Nov 16, 2002 at 08:19:26PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote: > On Sat, Nov 16, 2002 at 08:10:41PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote: > > > > No, but I and probably Rémi too read Branden's remark as: Even if we > > > > remove the package from non-free, the old locally installed copies of > > > > these packages wil still be available. In this context his remark > > > > makes sense, these old packages are worth nothing if nobody supports > > > > them anymore. > > > > > > Since non-free is not Debian users should not expect any support for > > > non-free packages anyway, it's just a bonus if it happens. > > > > Hate to sound like TB/JG here, but you need to re-read the social contract :p > > It clearly states that we support users of non-free packages. One could even > > maliciously misinterpret it as saying we support the use of non-free software. > > Hmm. Maybe I should note here that if it is true that they get non-free as a > bonus, then, they're entitled to the same bonus under the same conditions > under which they are entitled to the main packages. :) It really depends how you define non-free (non-free as in section non-free and non-free as in non-dfsg free) in that sentence. Though I must say that your definition probably is correct, or at least how most people read it. Though "supports its use, and we provide infrastructure" does not necessarily include support from our security team for instance. -- Peter Mathiasson, peter at mathiasson dot nu, http://www.mathiasson.nu GPG Fingerprint: A9A7 F8F6 9821 F415 B066 77F1 7FF5 C2E6 7BF2 F228
Attachment:
pgpyEDB3PM_dd.pgp
Description: PGP signature