+++ David Kastrup [27/10/06 10:22 +0200]:
You mean, making an example of Emacs users is ok because you think the experienced ones might be able to work around the attack? Last time I looked, the Debian policies were supposed to be good for its users, not a weapon against them.
The motivation here is not to make an example of emacs users. The documentation is non-free and must be removed. Debian policies are in fact supposed to be good for its users, but Debian puts protecting the user's freedom above the user's convenience. Since the documentation is non-free, it must be removed. So the question is, which would be doing emacs users a greater disservice, removing the rest of emacs, or not. And I think many will agree that removing emacs from debian completely would be more of an "attack" on emacs users than not removing it. stew
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature