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

Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????

["Followup-To:" header set to linux.debian.devel.]
Thomas Weber <thomas.weber.mail@gmail.com>:
>  On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 05:06:29PM -0500, William Pitcock wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 09:03 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> > > William Pitcock <nenolod@sacredspiral.co.uk> writes:
> > > 
> > > > Unfortunately, those who contribute to Debian must be dedicated to
> > > > ensuring future releases of Debian support the latest available
> > > > hardware at time of release.
> > > 
> > > That's news to me. Where is such a dedication required? Is it some
> > > special reading of the vague ?our users? commitment, or do you get
> > 
> > I worded that rather badly. You should imply "within acceptable terms of
> > the DFSG" here... in this case, putting stuff in the nonfree firmware
>  May I suggest that people cool down a little bit and don't assume the
>  worst from the other participants of the discussion.

I'm just a user, not a DD.  I've found this discussion very
informative, perhaps because of the passion some have brought to it.

All I'd like to add is, to all concerned, the other guy might be at
least partly right.  Damn.

Personally, I try my damnedest to avoid kit that can't be driven by
FLOSS, but I also taught myself long ago that Computer Games are
Fritterware.  I don't care about blistering 3D video performance, nor
do I care about wifi.  This discussion doesn't affect me (much), but
it's very interesting.

This thread doesn't begin to approach real flamewar status.  :-)

Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)    http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html      Linux Counter #80292
- -    http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html    Please, don't Cc: me.

Reply to: