Re: GR: Removal of non-free
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:30:55 -0500, Branden Robinson <email@example.com> said:
> On Sat, Jan 03, 2004 at 11:57:47PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Ah. If all this GR is a trial baloon to see the level of support
>> the non-free packages have, ok. If you want to actually remove
>> non-free from debian machines, and you wish the GR to actually
>> pass, then well, it would well behoove you to woo people on the
>> Yes, there is no need for you to heed my advice.
> I think it would be useful to poll the developers on the subject. I
This GR is not a poll. However, a poll can easily be set up
for the purpose -- and, if you think it is useful, I am sure you can
conduct this (you have demonstrated this skillset already)
> personally am willing to concede that a few more people might vote
> in favor of removing non-free if a PDF hundreds of pages in length
> were prepared cataloging every piece of software in it, and putting
> forth a more comprehensive transition plan than any this Project has
> ever seen before.
I think you have lost your grasp of practicality, and you want
us to vote for your proposals? You jump from a transition plan top "a
PDF hundreds of pages in length and putting forth a more
comprehensive transition plan than any this Project has ever seen
before"? And now you have reduced this from an effort to find a
solution to electioneering and polemics. *sigh*. And I had hopes for
> It challenges my credulity that dropping non-free would be anywhere
> close to as painful from a technical and infrastructural perspective
> as the transition from libc5 to libc6.
Apples and oranges. Though creating the infrastructure, and
paying for it, is unlikely to be trivial And duplicating the
administration shall cost hours that may well be spent on Debian.
> It is intriguing to me that some folks whom I have seen vigorously
> espousing ad-hoc problem solving suddenly become advocates of a
> highly bureaucratized approach when it comes to dropping non-free.
> From my perspective, bureaucracy (i.e., documented procedures,
> clearly delineated powers) is justified by abuse of power (actual or
Ah. Attack hypothetical opponents -- I am beginning to see
this as a hallmark of your tactics.
> I don't understand how a GR, itself a democratic process, to remove
> non-free could be an abuse of power. And I *definitely* don't see
> how a non-binding survey could be such. Perhaps someone could
> explain it to me?
And ascribe idiotic arguments to your opponents, and then
proceed to ridicule the opposition based on words you have put in
If at first you don't succeed that is only to be expected--there is a
little bit of good even in the best of us. (No one is as good as he
thinks he is.)
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.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