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

Re: Debian AMD64 Archive Move

On Sunday 08 May 2005 05:02, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> On 10283 March 1977, Ed Cogburn wrote:
> >>  Note: non-free is NOT provided yet. We need to decide what we do with
> >>  it, as we may be forbidden to distribute some of the software in it (we
> >> aren't Debian).
> > Wait a second, if you *aren't* Debian, it should be *easier* for you to 
> > provide non-free, not harder.
> No, not beeing Debian makes it only harder, not easier.
> There may be stuff in it with "Yes, Debian is allowed to distribute it"
> - which makes it undistributable for anyone else, except he gets the
> same.
> Or stuff you aren't allowed to built and then distribute or whatever
> else some idiot thought about for his license.
> > The only problem with non-free is the internal politics of Debian.
> No.
> > Ubuntu certainly doesn't have any problem providing access to, but not
> > support for, non-free.
> I dont care what/how they do it. Maybe they analyzed it, or just ignore
> it and wait if someone plays law-games with them, i dont know.
> I dont want law-games for me or for our mirrors or for the place where
> we host the machine, thats not worth the stuff thats in there, so its
> not added right away.
> > The best thing is to keep the packages you have now until we find what's going 
> > on.
> Whats going on == someone needs to check it. Thats it.

That was the point made by Ed Cogburn.  Its already been checked in the other
arch!  If this is not the case please explain why.  Without that explanation I am
forced to agree with Ed - the problem are political...  Which is the bane of debian.

Ed Tomlinson

Reply to: