On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 12:51:35PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> [incidentally, your sigs all fail to verify, for some reason]
Geez, what now? Stupid bloody program.
> >>"Anthony" == Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> Anthony> In truth, other members of the Debian community (using the
> Anthony> term very broadly) are making determinations about whether
> Anthony> software is distributable in dozens of other countries when
> Anthony> they setup mirrors.
> I think the term you are looking for is ``Users''.
Actually I'm referring more to the mirrors, but it applies to both.
> > This is a complete strawman. No one's said anything about adding 150+
> > countries. Maybe two or three, or even half a dozen, but not 150+.
> ANd, incidentally, if any tags are permitted, I shall insist
> on at least non-india, non-bhutan, non-nepal, non-sri-lanka,
> non-pakistan, and non-myanmar tags (the latter shall probably cover
> half the distrivution).
Personally, I'm developing a bit of a pet peeve against people who insist
that things be done while at the same time refusing to do them themselves.
Are you going to go through the distribution and maintain a list of which
packages all these tags apply to, and which they don't?
If not, you've got no business insisting on their existance.
> I am sure the chinese folks wowuld like these
> tags too. Why should we continue to have a tendency to lean towards
> providing infrastructure support to the us/european regions? (I can
> just see the enthusiasm on the linux-india mailing list).
Because we have a large number of developers from the US and European
regions, because we have large numbers of users from the US and European
regions, and because all those countries' laws are similar enough that
coping with the additional non-<...> tags should actually be feasible.
``You can't have non-DE tags because no one would be able to manage
non-IN!''
And sure, if someone *is* able to reasonably keep track of which packages
are legal in India, well, then there's no issue with having a non-IN tag.
> Anthony> You keep asserting this, but you're not giving any evidence
> Anthony> as to why either
> Anthony> (a) this applies at all, or
> Anthony> (b) this becomes significantly more of a risk by adding,
> Anthony> say, non-UK and non-DE identifiers.
> *Sigh*. There is always a chance of making mistakes. With all
> of us concentrating on one or two countries laws (espescially given
> that slashdot brings any changes in US laws under a microscope), we
> are less likely tomake errors. More countries increase the chances of
> a mistake. Adding *ANY* tag increases the risk.
More packages increase the risk of us having bugs in our distribution too.
Personally, I suspect no one's going to be bothered to maintain the tags
for Germany or the UK, let alone anywhere else, so I suspect this is
a non issue. At this point I'm fairly convinced that there aren't any
realistic legal or technical issues against it though.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
-- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
Attachment:
pgpd4a2BqNpij.pgp
Description: PGP signature