Re: The "Free" vs. "Non-Free" issue
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 08:19:12AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> That is, in my opinion, equally wrong headed. Non-free is
> present because at least one developer found the packages there
> useful enough to buck the trend and package. I think it is important
> we continue to provide a repository of useful software for which we
> do not have free replacements.
I guess the question that keeps occuring to me is: why must Debian
provide this service now? If we had not provided it all along, would we
start it now, or is it just here because it's easier to keep it here?
Perhaps what I'm looking for is a nice summary of the arguments against
moving it. It seems that the reasons for not moving it change on an
almost daily basis sometimes.
-- John
Reply to: