non-free removal GR and our position to it ...

[Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>]

Hello,

I don't know if you are aware of that, but a discussion has been raging
on debian-vote about the removal of non-free from our archive, our BTS,
and so on.

I have been involved in it (even proposed a GR ammendment, altough it
was a bit 'bancal'), and also since i am involved with non-free as DD (i
maintain the unicorn ADSL modem drivers) and as user (i need lha, but
also also because of ocaml-doc and ocaml-books).

Since the debian-ocaml team is involved with 3 packages in non-free, i
would like to hear about your/our position on this issue (well, and
eventually second the anti-non-free removal if you feel like this). I
have also sent a small mention about this to the caml team this morning,
in marge of an email concerning the bug report :

  http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=227159

About a QPLed caml-types.el from Damien Doligez. The debian-legal
response to my request on this bug report has been less than thrilling
(basically arguig that it would be polite to RMS not to distribute
non-GPL compatible .el files :/).

So, what is our position on this, both individually and as a group ?

Friendly,

Sven Luther