On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 01:20:41AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:38:08 -0800, Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> said:
>
> > Jeroen van Wolffelaar <jeroen@wolffelaar.nl> writes:
> >> Since 2.59a-1 of autoconf, it does not have documentation
> >> anymore. Due to the complexity of the packages, it would be really
> >> nice to have documentation for autoconf in sarge.
> >>
> >> I'm therefore requesting for this documentation to be packaged
> >> separately. Note that since GFDL documents in main are acceptable
> >> for the Sarge release, you may upload to main now. After sarge is
> >> released, however, this package would probably need to be moved to
> >> non-free.
>
> > The rationale in GR 2004-004 for delaying the implementation of GR
> > 2003-003 is that we don't have time to implement it before release.
> > It would then be pretty hypocritical to start adding packages that
> > violate DFSG. What, we have time to *add* packages containing FDL
> > documentation, but not time enough to *remove* FDL documentation
> > from packages?
>
> Yes, it would indeed be hypocritical, were we one homogeneous
> collective. But while some people may have time to add packages for
> non-free documentation, I don't have time to deal with splitting up
> Gnus and make. Since we are a loose knit collection of autonomous
> labour units, there is this little discrepancy.
>
> Sorry for not being the Borg.
Hi folks,
The Borg want total galactic domination. I thought we wanted to
do the same :-)
-Kev
--
counter.li.org #238656 -- goto counter.li.org and be counted!
(__)
(oo)
/------\/
/ | ||
* /\---/\
~~ ~~
...."Have you mooed today?"...
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature