Re: Bits from the release team: the plans for etch
* Bernhard R. Link:
> * Florian Weimer <email@example.com> [051025 13:51]:
>> * Steve Langasek:
>> > Frank Lichtenheld has already posted an announcement detailing the
>> > release team's plans for the question of non-DFSG documentation in main.
>> Just to clarify, is technical documentation that is only available in
>> non-editable formats (e.g. Postscript files)
> Little nitpick and petition: Please write "generated Postscript files"
> in such examples, as postscript files can be perfectly editable and
> only the existance of easier languages causes the vast majority of
> postscript files being generated non-editable forms. (As is assembler
> files currently, or as C source code would be if almost everyone switched
> to some other language with a compiler generating C code as intermediate
On systems without digital restrictions managemet without mandatory
enforcement , it goes without saying that you can change bytes as
you like, but it is hardly the preferred way of implementing
Is it really controversial that these problems are bugs? I assumed
that only the RC status could be subject to debate.
1. Both the kernel and GCC include DRM, but without mandatory