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

Re: Debian AMD64 Archive Move

Ed Cogburn <edcogburn@hotpop.com> writes:

> On Sunday 08 May 2005 4:23pm, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Ed Tomlinson <tomlins@cam.org> writes:
>> > On Sunday 08 May 2005 09:27, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>> >> On 10283 March 1977, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
>> >> >> 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.
>> >>
>> >> We are *NOT* Debian, thats all you need to get!
>> >
>> > Ok.  So from what I understand you are worried there are packages that
>> > debian can distribute but only debian has the permission...   If this is
>> > the case is there not a way you can ask debian to distribute just the non
>> > free stuff?  ie.  This project builds the packages from debian sources,
>> > debian hosts the non free stuff on one of their servers.
>> Who is to say we are allowed to build the binaries?
> This isn't an answer to his question.

Obviously it isn't an answere but a questions. One designed to show
him the errors of his ways.

The project can't just build the packages from non-free since nothing
says we have the right to. And in fact there are known cases the
specificaly say we DONT. Wether Debian distributes it or someone else
doesn't even figure into that.

> He's saying why not let the AMD64 
> non-free be distributed from a Debian server, since you're original excuse 
> was that "you aren't Debian".  The answer is of course that you never even 
> bothered to ask "Debian" for help or for a statement about your identity that 
> would eliminate any theoretical legal threat.  Hell, you could have just kept 

Hell, no. Why would we ever ask? We also never got those negative
responses and rejections about this from the ftp-masters, the DPL, the
DAM, the RMs, the Security team, .... We never asked for amd64 to be
added to sid over a year ago and never filed a bug about it. No never.

> non-free on alioth and linked to it from AMD64's new location until a 
> solution to the problem was found since non-free by itself is very small and 
> the move away from alioth was because of space reasons, but no, even keeping 
> the old location temporarily wasn't acceptable, non-free had to go, period.  

Actualy no. Space reasons actualy never figured into that for me. The
new system is just some 10-20 times faster, has the right
infrastructure, the right software, someone with root on the project.

And the old location is still there. Even now it still has non-free
although the old main/contrib parts have been removed. There are also
still at least 2 mirrors of it with public access as you might have
seen if you had bothered to check.

> You saw a chance to get rid of non-free, even though its temporary, even 
> though a majority of DDs have officially disagreed with you in a vote, and 
> its only result is to annoy the AMD64 users until AMD64 returns to a "Debian" 
> server, all because of your extremist ideology.

No DD has voted on the legality of a project outside of debian blidnly
building and distributing packages from non-free. And even if they had
it would not have any weight.

When it came to adding the packages from alioth into the DAK and we
hit non-free we took a step back, looked, saw that we can't just add
it and decided to put it off till someone can look it over in detail.

As you might have known if you had volunteered, joined the irc
channel, help patch things together, discussed solutions, etc. I
didn't see you doing any of that. Not now and not in the last 2 years.

> I've been using Debian since pre-1.0 days when I got it off an Infomagic CD 
> when I didn't have regular net access, but the times have changed, certainly 
> the people around Debian have.  I never would have thought that Debian would 
> reach the point where it would deliberately and **pointlessly** annoy its own 
> users because of software religion, instead of just trying to produce the 
> best Linux distro possible, but its apparently come to that.  No wonder 
> Ubuntu looms large over Debian now, they're taking the best of Debian, but 
> leaving behind the religious wars, and they will now gain strength and speed 

And Ubuntu also leaves behind suspectible non-free packages.

> as Debian slows down due to endless religious infighting.  Anyway, its been 
> fun, but its time to move on now, apparently.  Goodbye all.

Let me ask just one questions:

Do you have any idea who I or the other debian-amd64 members are and
what we have done the last 2 years?

You might also want to check those names against db.debian.org.


Reply to: