Re: Another Non-Free Proposal
On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 11:13:11AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 03:51:07PM +0000, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> > Mutt uses debbugs, and isn't a project of the magnitude of GNOME.
>
> Which still doesn't make it comparable to non-free.
You won't find an example which fits perfectly for non-free.
> On the one hand, it's much more cohesive: instead of dozens of unrelated
> packages you have mut.
>
> On the other hand, it's a development project, not a distribution of
> stuff available from elsewhere.
So what? We're talking about setting up debbugs for a moderatly-sized
project. Whether it's the best Free email client or a random collection
of non-free software does not matter that much *technically*.
Anyway, the examples of a huge amount of backports done by various
people, countless custom distributions based on Debian, sub-projects
partly maintained outside debian and even the development of a whole new
architecture which requires considerable amounts of changes to the core
packaging tools on Alioth (amd64) are enough evidence that one does not
need to depend on auric, master and klecker to do work for Debian. In my
humble opinion, of course.
By the time non-free got created, maintaining packages outside of Debian
was not trivial (if done at all). This *has* changed, and can be done
much more easily today. It still takes some (maybe a lot of) work of
course.
To get back to doing something productive: What timeframe would you
consider adequate for the duplication of reasonable support for non-free
outside of the Debian servers?
Michael
Reply to: