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

Re: Debian AMD64 Archive Move

On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 01:07:30PM -0400, Ed Cogburn wrote:
> On Tuesday 10 May 2005 11:19am, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > Seriously, get some patience and don't inflame the situation
> > please. Things like "most of that" is of zero help in deciding what
> > can go in and what not. We know most of it can, the question is what
> > packages are those in particular. We can't just add all of non-free
> > and say it is mostly OK.
> Yes you can.  That's my point.  Non-free has already been vetted by Debian 
> itself, and we are part of Debian.  Any rational judge will see that, if 
> given evidence by the Debian organization itself (see below).

Are you a lawyer?

If not, I'm not particularly inclined to believe you on this count.

> > > Just establish the non-free section and move everything over.  If anyone
> > > complains then just drop the package they're complaining about.  Of
> > > course, NO ONE is going to complain since they know we will "become"
> > > Debian soon anyway (and for all intents we ARE Debian - just not on their
> > > server), and they've already given Debian permission to distribute.  For
> > > the rest of non-free, permission to distribute is not an issue, and not
> > > the reason they're in non-free to begin with.
> >
> > The pine author would for one thing.
> Then load everything up but pine, if that's the only one you know of.

It's the only one we know of /now/. There might be more. That's the
whole problem.

[rest of blatter snipped, doesn't make sense anyway]

The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the
pavement is precisely one bananosecond

Reply to: