Re: Screw non-free.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>>> "HM" == Hamish Moffatt <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
HM> I don't think the removal of non-free from debian.org can be
HM> justified on the basis of time & effort alone.
Of course not. Supporting non-free and contrib also complicates all our
tools and confuses people as to what "Debian" is.
HM> Firstly, everyone working on non-free is doing so of their own free
HM> will; if they didn't think it was worth the time, they
HM> wouldn't do it.
So, if I follow you, an Importance Scale would look something like
^ ^ ^
| | |
Important enough to | Important enough
distribute with | to set up a new
Debian | project
of good non-free
Like, they're totally life-and-death crucial, up to the point where
they'd actually be worth starting another project for. The importance
of non-free falls in that sweet spot between them. Is that it?
HM> Therefore the net benefit, time-wise, is negative.
The net benefit to Debian-the-project is positive. _Somebody_else_
deals with the new project, not Debian. That's the whole idea.
Yes, if there are Debian maintainers who want to participate in the
new project, that's somewhat harder for them. Not walking-across-
broken-glass hard, but harder than the status quo. It's unfortunate,
and regrettable. Then again, it's their decision, as you said. Free
will and all that.
HM> In any case you misread me;
No, I'm just pointing out the hole in your argument. I have a hard
time seeing why Debian resources should be used to support non-free
packages if they're not worth supporting elsewhere.
HM> I'm undecided as to whether I would bother to contribute to
HM> non-free.org if Suffield's GR passes.
Well, what you do with your own time is your business. I'm just asking
that you don't use Debian machines and infrastructure to do your
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----