On Thu, May 06, 1999 at 03:39:02AM +0200, Remco Blaakmeer wrote: > Yes, I'm sorry to have missed that. Both of you are obviously right. > > Now, I ask the same question again but with a little difference: Since > Policy defines which packages can go into 'main' and which can't, can > somebody please point out which part of Policy these programs fail? I have > read the requirements for packages that want to go into main. I don't see > what's wrong with free packages that talk proprietary protocols for which > is no free 'other end' available, as far as Policy is concerned. I can't point to you such a place because it doesn't exist. This "new distinction" was distinctly proposed as a NEW policy, perhaps (very arguably, as we've seen) logically derived from the old, but not as existing policy. N.B., it wasn't even formally proposed, just brought up for discussion. -- G. Branden Robinson | We either learn from history or, Debian GNU/Linux | uh, well, something bad will happen. branden@ecn.purdue.edu | -- Bob Church cartoon.ecn.purdue.edu/~branden/ |
Attachment:
pgpraV6wAHNVl.pgp
Description: PGP signature