On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 12:05:35PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote: > #include <hallo.h> > * Branden Robinson [Sun, Nov 17 2002, 02:42:34AM]: > > > > > You cannot know this. > > > > > > Sure we can. > > > > No, not unless you are omniscient. Do you claim omniscience? > > Of course not, but you should not either! I have not done so; please do not imply that I have. > No, that is the reason for stopping all this waste of energy and keep > the situation as-is. So you oppose the very idea that the Developers vote on this proposal, even if the General Resolution fails to pass? > > There already exist many sites on the net where one can Debian packages > > that aren't from Debian. Does that hurt Debian's reputation or not? > > When they will have to search for $SOME_SITE to get acroread, povray and > graphviz, this will hurt the reputation, yes. Does it hurt Debian's reputation that people have to get acroread from $SOME_SITE now? (apt-cache search acroread) > As said, most users do not. Our priorities are our users. That may be your feeling, but that's exactly not what the Social Contract says: Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software Nothing in the Social Contract implies that Free Software takes a back seat to our users. The Social Contract itself is a contract "with the Free Software Community", not with the "non-free software community", whatever that might be. If you feel that Free Software community should be subordinated to the needs of our users, then you should propose an amendment to John's General Resolution stating that. If he rejects it and it acquires sufficient seconds, your amended proposal will appear on the ballot. http://www.debian.org/social_contract > There is always a bit of violating the social contract when you doom > the non-free software without providing a free alternative. So it violates the Social Contract for us not to provide a Free alternative to Mentor Graphics? > > > If I need acroread for some presentation, I want to use it. Know. Not > > > to wait till xpdf bug is fixed so I can run it in full-screen. > > > > You'll have to talk to Adobe about that; acroread is not distributed by > > Debian anymore. > > Oh, well, he really removed the package from the pool few days ago :(( Is that a violation of the Social Contract? Adobe has made it practically impossible for us to distribute acroread any longer; does that mean they have *forced* us to violate the Social Contract? > > > What exactly has this to do with Free vs. Non-Free software difference? > > > > It is a rebuttal to your assertion that "the time sacrificed for that > > repository will be subtracted from the time sacrificed for Debian > > proper." > > Unrealistical argument, IMO. Only if absolutely everyone behaves in exactly the way that you predict. I, for one, am skeptical of your efforts at deterministic psychology. > The whole thing was started the wrong way. Prepare the GR, then start > the discussion. That's exactly what happened. http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2002/debian-vote-200211/msg00005.html It seems disingenuous to employ falsehoods in support of your position. -- G. Branden Robinson | Exercise your freedom of religion. Debian GNU/Linux | Set fire to a church of your branden@debian.org | choice. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
pgp6YTckVWOsh.pgp
Description: PGP signature