Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
Chris Knadle <Chris.Knadle@coredump.us> writes:
> On Saturday, March 17, 2012 21:53:18, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Hence the Debian patent policy.
>> We can't just ignore things like this, nor is it responsible use of
>> project resources to openly flaunt disobedience to laws, however
>> ill-conceived. But neither is it Debian policy to seek out trouble
>> when that trouble isn't forthcoming.
>> If you do want to be part of an organization that openly disobeys
>> stupid laws and makes a point of civil disobedience, more power to you.
>> I personally will be cheering you on. But the Debian Project is not
>> that organization, nor is it structured to be that organization (and
>> carefully structuring such an organization is important). The Debian
>> Project has other goals, which mostly require that it work within the
>> legal framework that it has available while making public statements
>> when that legal framework interferes with project goals.
> The above explains the whole reason d-m.o exists.
> However perhaps it also might explain the tenuous relationship d.o has
> with d-m.o because d.o may need to distance itself from the work d-m.o
Yup. Exactly. Christian is taking on himself the legal risk of providing
those packages, which the project as a whole can't really do. Discussion
about the confusion that can be caused by some of the other packages he
carries aside (and I do think that issue is real), I for one thank him for
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>