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

Re: Removal of non-free

* MJ Ray <markj@cloaked.freeserve.co.uk> [030524 13:08]:
> Maybe, but giving a supported distribution system for it removes some
> of the desire, doesn't it?

I think a distribution system with an emphasis on free software, also
helping with non-free bits one can not get rid from is something useful 
to many people.  Wihtout non-free parts, people needing them will have 
two possibilities:

They might use another system, which might force them to even use 
non-free parts for installation or configuration. (They might not
like it, but not everyone can value long term goods as freedom over 
short term things like manpower needed).

Or they might use some non-free parts from another source. As this
source has no more emphasis on free software, it is less likely to
drop things when a replacement arises and the non-free parts might
recommend other non-free parts more than the free parts. (additonally
such a source would need resources, our project would no longer have).

> >  [...] Do you really think even the thread of 
> >  removing would be realistic? ) [...]
> Yes.

I think this is one of the most important difference. I just can not
even imagine how much I had to narrow my mind to believe this. I daily
struggel to get free software anywhere near me.  If I just cannot close 
my eyes and pretend nothing non-free exists or is needed. If I did,
this might even cause non-free operating systems to return to places
I banished them from.

> If non-free things are uploaded to main, surely that's a bug?

It is. And anyone will see it this way, as long as there is non-free.

> >> is fairly minimal (set up a BTS, apt repository - what else?).
> > webpages, autobuilders, account managment, keyrings, ....
> Web?  When did an apt source have a web page?

Now, consider there was a nondebian.org. Wouldn't it need webpages
to describe what it is, how to participate, what guidelines to follow.
Websites searching the package description and looking at package

> Autobuilders?  Are pbuilder et al so hard?

There are no autobuilders for non-free stuff within Debian. Do you
really want autobuilders for non-free created somewhere else?

> Account management?  wtf?
> Keyrings?  Can't we use the same one.

As long as non-free is handled by Debian infrastructure, nothing has 
to be done for this. I hope the developer database will not be
exported anywhere. (If it was, I and hopefully man others would insist 
in Debian having control over the place it is exported to. But then
it would be just time-consuming change of nomenclature.

  Bernhard R. Link

Sendmail is like emacs: A nice operating system, but missing
an editor and a MTA.

Reply to: