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

Re: Moving contrib and non-free of master.debian.org



On Wed, Jun 23, 1999 at 03:05:18PM -0700, Darren O. Benham wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 1999 at 05:54:02PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > > >         And the non-free appearing in the path is not a dead give away?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > that's those debs are not an part of the official distribution?  No, it's
> > > not.
> > 
> > Would making them available as
> > ftp.debian.org/debian/dists/stable/not-officially-part-of-debian--non-free/
> that's preferrable to the seperate server?? 

No. They're equally onerous.

> > make everyone happy then? (With a nice symlink from stable/non-free for
> > the convenience of our users, of course. :) If that's not enough, how is
> The symlink, of course, ruins the issue.

And also keeps some level of compatability without wasting a boatload of
disk space. (Do we really have the resources to maintain two completely
seperate copies of non-free for a while, or is the plan to spring this
on people with no transition period?)

> > non-free.debian.org enough? Shouldn't it be non-free.sorta-debian.org?
> sorta-debian would require another internic registration.  It might be
> better to leave them out.

Is this renaming thing really important or is it a gesture? If it's
important, I don't see that the inconvenience of registering a new name
is relevant. If it's a gesture, then my silly path idea will
have just as much impact with far less work.

> > How does the casual browser know that something on a particular server
> > that *is* in the debian.org domain isn't really part of debian? Again,
> > who's this targeted at--casual users or hard-liners who already know the
> > difference?
> I believe casual users and newbies and the sensitive.

But you didn't answer the implied question of how casual users/newbies
know that somename.debian.org is more "official" than
othername.debian.org. IMHO, those with enough exposure to debian to
understand our position on officialness *already understand
free/non-free*.

Mike Stone

Attachment: pgpORb5e5jArj.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: