Re: Another Non-Free Proposal
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 14:45:34 -0500, Dale E Martin
<dmartin@cliftonlabs.com> said:
> I understand your point. But it's obvious to me that making a
> change will require effort above and beyond making it. If the
> initial change is most of the cost, perhaps it's worth it.
> What if today we put in a CNAME for nonfree.org to debian.org and
> then configured apache to not show non-free directories for people
> coming in on debian.org http requests? (Ignore ftp and rsync for
> the moment for the sake of discussion.) Would doing just _that
> much_ be too much of an inconvience to the users? If it is, then
> what would it take to make that much of a change palatable?
I do not think thast would be too much inconvenience, no.
Indeed, creating such an alternative would cause me to change my
stance. I am mostly opposed to "just drop the support, if it was
that important it shall magically materialize" aspects of the
proposal.
> Agreed. I came into this discussion thinking the removal of
> non-free was "obviously" a good idea. I'm still not sure what the
> right answer is (there is a lot of rhetoric and intellectual
> masturbation clouding the real discussion). Overall, I guess that
> like always it's going to be an "action is louder than words"
> situation, and until someone cares enough to create a parallel
> nonfree.org and work out all of the details, the status quo will
> remain. The irony is that it's probably going to have to be someone
> who is very pro-removal of nonfree who does it.
I would be willing to take time away from Debian in order to
help support such an insfrastructure.
manoj
--
To have died once is enough. Publius Vergilius Maro (Virgil)
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: