On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 01:20:41AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:38:08 -0800, Ben Pfaff <firstname.lastname@example.org> said: > > > Jeroen van Wolffelaar <email@example.com> 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?"...
Description: Digital signature