Re: Statistics on non-free usage
On Sat, Jan 10, 2004 at 07:35:44AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2004 at 12:10:57AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 10, 2004 at 06:53:17AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 02:02:43PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > > > It hasn't even done that; as I have had to use Java from third-party
> > > > repositories at work for some time and have not noticed it being any
> > > > lower quality that non-free packages in Debian.
> > >
> > > ah, because you used it on x86. wasn't that one of the arguments for
> > > removing non-free ?
> > Huh? I totally do not follow what you're saying here.
> See Michael Blank argumentation about non-x86 arch in non-free.
Can you give me a URL? Finding individual arguments in this thread is
not easily done.
> > > > The lack of 1.4 for PowerPC is not really germane; Debian doesn't have
> > > > it for PowerPC either and Debian doesn't keep non-i386 archs in sync
> > > > either.
> > >
> > > And how would removing non-free from the debian archives help here.
> > It wouldn't. That's why I said it's "not really germane."
> Err, another misleading affirmation, actually it was Steve who said that
> not you.
Oops, sorry Steve; it sounded like something I wrote. s/I said/he
said/. I retract the incorrect attribution.
> It is simply not possible to discuss people who are not honest and try
> every trick in the book to come out right, even if they are wrong, as
> you evidently are.
Oh c'mon. Just because I made a mistake doesn't mean that I'm
dishonest. After all, you are the one that said your package has "0
entries in popcon", then tried to change it to "used" once I had
shown you to be incorrect (knowing full well that "used" is a different
category in popcon), then said that I gave the "impression" that nobody
was installing your packages, even when my own figures showed some of
them were installed on 3% of the machines. This is being honest how.