Re: mutt no longer in non-us?
Chris Lawrence wrote:
> It highly inconveniences our users, however. No part of the Social
> Contract says "protesting stupid laws is more important than our users."
How does it inconvencience our users?
> It also inconveniences the Debian maintainer, who has to maintain two
> different forks of the same code (source and binary). It wastes space
> on our mirrors. It creates confusion by having multiple packages that
> do the exact same thing (less a system() or two).
What are you talking about? Both source and binary would go in non-US.
see shy jo