Re: The "Free" vs. "Non-Free" issue
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 11:10:21AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> I see only one vital point for having those packages on the "real Debian
> infrastructure", instead of a mere copy of it: You could continue to
> reassign bugs from non-free to main.
>
> Anything else I missed?
The "real Debian infrastructure" has relatively easy to understand issues
(dependencies, conflicts, structure, security, contacts).
A "mere copy of it" doesn't currently exist, so will be harder to
understand. For example, I would be a bit more worried about trojans
in the context of some of the flakier apt-get.org feeds than in the
context of something provided by a debian developer (or even a university
project).
Remember that we're providing binary packages, not source, and binary
packages are harder to read than source.
--
Raul
Reply to: