[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

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'?

Reply to: