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

Re: What I would like to vote for (was: Negative Summary of the Split Proposal)



On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 01:36:57PM +0900, Ionutz Borcoman wrote:
> What I'm really missing in our current state is an explanation in the
> description of non-free telling me why is that package there.

Ian Jackson proposed this well over a year ago, but nobody seems to have
done anything about it.  (Well, I did, but not too many people use xtrs.)

> To conclude, I will probably vote for keeping the current state of
> splitting (all stuff on the same server with main, non-free and contrib
> branches). But I would like to see (in time, not immediately) that
> non-free packages explains why they are not free from the very
> beginning, aka in the description field of the package. Probably this
> should be imposed through the policy for non-free packages.

I think we should do both.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson              |   The errors of great men are venerable
Debian GNU/Linux                 |   because they are more fruitful than the
branden@ecn.purdue.edu           |   truths of little men.
cartoon.ecn.purdue.edu/~branden/ |   -- Friedrich Nietzsche

Attachment: pgp5fP9t4EWXi.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: