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

Re: Bug#283717: hasciicam: enhance Description

El Miércoles 01 Diciembre 2004 16:44, jaromil escribió:
> Hash: SHA1
> On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 03:43:29PM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote:
> > Re: jaromil in <[🔎] 20041201094756.GI17346@dyne.org>
> >
> > > in case you are an arrogant person (i don't mean you are, i just don't
> > > know you at all) then consider that the GNU FDL license applied to the
> > > manual and documentation of hasciicam requires: the Invariant Sections
> >
> > May I suggest to move the package to non-free then?
> may i suggest to move the package out of Debian then?
> now please you all take a breath and stop thinking like a robot;
> try to imagine my position, the position of an author of software which
> happens to be included also in Debian.
> this is something that you should carefully evaluate in order to
> accomply to your blessed mission of distributing free software.

I can understand your position, and why you are disapointed.
But you have to think there is Debian Policy, in order all these packages seem 
a distribution and not only a bunch of packages.

Debian Policy states:
"The description should describe the package (the program) to a user (system 
administrator) who has never met it before so that they have enough 
information to decide whether they want to install it. This description 
should not just be copied verbatim from the program's documentation.
Remember that in many situations the user may only see the synopsis line - 
make it as informative as you can."

> ok now please be careful:
> i'm talking about correctness and respect!
> I think many people here is being very arrogant and this is indeed not
> the first time i realize that among Debian developers, especially the
> youngs and less experienced ones, so i finally come to this small issue
> to give evidence to a more general problem here.

I agree with that. What can we do?

> now please get out of my hut and go playing indian and cowboys in the
> garden you kids! :)

You are funny :-D


Reply to: