also sprach Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> [2009.11.18.2201 +0100]:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 05:09:56PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> > Yes, the security FAQ addresses the non-free issue. This doesn't
> > make the situation any more desirable. At least not for me.
>
> But that's not what you expressed in your mail, which could have
> been (and probably was) taken as an authoritative statement on
> behalf of the project.
Those who disagree can make similarly "authoritative" statements in
the opposite direction.
Paul's e-mail says everything I wanted to say, and more, and better:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2009/11/msg00049.html
The only addition is that you cannot really backport packages from
unstable. But that's something that could be addressed on
a per-package exceptional basis.
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o> Related projects:
: :' : proud Debian developer http://debiansystem.info
`. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck http://vcs-pkg.org
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
"women who want to be equal to men lack ambition."
-- timothy leary
Attachment:
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)