On Sat, Jan 03, 2004 at 04:48:49PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 03, 2004 at 07:34:17PM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > Why does there need to be anything else?
>
> I'm looking, perhaps in vain, for some rationale behind what you've
> been proposing.
I thought it was obvious. 'Answering the question "Does Debian, as a
project, wish to discontinue support of non-free?"'.
> > You've just restated the question that we're trying to vote on ("Should
> > we support non-free [y/n]").
>
> Eh?
>
> I certainly have restated the question. But I haven't *just* restated
> it -- that restatement was a part of a question. That question, at its
> crudest, is "What's the point?"
The point of what? Supporting non-free? Not supporting it? Asking
whether we want to support it? I'd have thought the point of all these
were pretty obvious. I can think of several reasons for all of them
off the top of my head.
> > Your reponses to it, including this last one[0], have all simply said "I
> > would vote [y], therefore I don't agree with removing it, so I don't
> > think we should remove it". I think we got that part already. Please
> > wait until the ballots go out before trying to vote :P
>
> You seem to be saying that it's futile to even ask if there's any benefit
> to be gained by dropping non-free.
No, I'm saying that your argument is just circling endlessly around "I
don't want to drop non-free", and pointing out that you should wait
until the vote happens before trying to vote.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature