Re: ????? non-free.
> Many packages in non-free haven't had consistent versions across all
> architectures in over two years.
> > > > The buildds currently ignore non-free packages.
> > > How do you propose to rectify or work around that?
First of all, repeated (well, kind ;) requests to install needed build
dependencies could evtly. no longer be ignored silently.
Most packages from respectable software authors in 'see-the-license' are
"really ok" and often miss DFSG only on minor issues. While enforcing
the buildd structure, discussions about autobuilding selected packages
could be had.
(M)any maintainers want their packages to be available for as many users
as possible, it was just not possible to build them in recent past.
Have a nice day, martin
PS. Dict'ing the subject line confuses me even more. While i certainly
have fun with the software, i hope that the originator of this subject
did not mean to 'defeat expectation through trickery' or 'oppress'?