Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels
On Saturday 26 March 2005 20:25, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 03:59:49PM +0000, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > Scripsit Hamish Moffatt <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 05:37:02PM +0000, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > >> Do you have any arguments for this that do *not* basically reason
> > >> backwards from "we want this stuff to be in main, freedoms or not"?
> > >
> > > Well, I would start with "we want this stuff in main" and work from
> > > there;
> > See? There you go.
> I have a hard time believing that this is a fundamentally wrong approach to
Wait until someone comes along and wants to modify the DFSG to allow M$ Office
into main, "because we want this stuff in main."
<soapbox>We have main for those things which are DFSG-free and non-free for
the things redistributable but not-DFSG-free and there are people who rely on
- hallo... wie gehts heute?
- *hust* gut *rotz* *keuch*
- gott sei dank kommunizieren wir über ein septisches medium ;)
-- Matthias Leeb, Uni f. angewandte Kunst, 2005-02-15