Re: Another Non-Free Proposal
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 09:14:16PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 11:18:30AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 02:18:38PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > Well, no. If the issue was resolving confusion, we could just say "main
> > > is 100% DFSG-free software; non-free isn't; both are part of the project;
> > > we distribute both" and rewrite any confusing or misleading claims we
> > > make elsewhere.
> > I don't think it's a problem with wording or anything. We could write
> > NON-FREE IS NOT PART OF DEBIAN with <blink> tags on www.debian.org, and
> > some people would still think it is when they come across
> > /debian/pool/non-free.
>
> Yes, that's because "NON-FREE IS NOT PART OF DEBIAN" is a confusing and
> misleading claim, when Debian as a project distributes non-free software.
>
> "non-free is not a part of Debian's main distribution" on the otherhand
> isn't.
Yeah, I noticed that problem, but forgot to fish the mail out of the
queue before sending the others, sorry.
What about '*the* Debian Distribution'? Would you consider non-free as
being part of that? (As opposed to 'Debian's main distribution')
cheers,
Michael
Reply to: