Re: [rant] Re: Consequences of moving Emacs Manuals to non-free
On 23 Mar 2006, David Kastrup uttered the following:
> Ben Pfaff <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> Sven Joachim <email@example.com> writes:
>>> On Wed, Mar 15, Miles Bader wrote:
>>>> In practice I guess it's just going to mean that most people end
>>>> up putting non-free in their sources.list, weakening the effect
>>>> of having a separation between "free" and "non-free" in the first
>>>> place, and more users end up confused because lack of hard
>>>> dependencies will mean the doc packages don't get installed.
>>> It may get worse. The maintainer of the GNU make package has just
>>> kicked out the documentation for good, offering no substituton
>>> whatsoever. [...]
>> Why should a Debian maintainer feel compelled to package non-free
> Why should he feel compelled to package anything at all?
To be honest, I don't feel compelled, no. I just happen to be
packaging them for a while now.
The Law of the Letter: The best way to inspire fresh thoughts is to
seal the envelope.
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C