Re: GR: Removal of non-free
> > If someone were to implement a decent alternative for that infrastructure,
> > I would be amenable to leaving that part out of the social contract,
> > but I do not like your "drop it on the floor" approach to this issue.
On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 02:46:52PM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> That's half the point. You can vote on it when the ballot goes out.
Mind including some meaningful content with your words?
> > Furthermore, I think it's important to acknowledge that some of our
> > users require the use of non-DFSG software, and to support that use.
>
> See clause 1, last sentence. Clause 5 is redundant in this respect.
Hmm... ok, I could live with that.
However, if your sole purpose is to mess things up... well... I guess I
would just live with your brush offs, and vote against your "drop things
on the floor" proposal.
Could you tell me about the plan for dealing with contrib and non-free?
I don't really care whether those are "a part of the debian project" or
"not a part of the debian project". However, I very much do care that
they exist, and that they continue to exist.
For example, if I see a real and inclusive effort to set up a separate
"project" to maintain and support contrib and non-free -- one we could
perhaps link to from distrib/netinst (one I could join, if I so desired)
-- I'd have no objection whatsoever to voting for a proposal to drop
clause 5 from the social contract (thus allowing this hypothetical
"other project" to take over contrib and non-free).
Thanks,
--
Raul
Reply to: