Re: summary of software licenses in non-free
On 2004-01-13 12:35:58 +0000 Hamish Moffatt <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 10:22:04AM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
So what were you calling a major PITA to our users, then?
Lots of it. Dealing with a new archive. Dealing with a different
BTS. etc. Especially since it's all con and no pro for those users.
New archive is a one-time edit to sources.list, dealing with a
different BTS seems to require little user effort (Bugs header,
reportbug files), etc.
Did someone say 124 developers had packages in non-free? That's not
"insignificant" is a noise word unless you define what you see as
insignificant portion of our developers, you know.
Well I don't consider 15% or thereabouts to be insignificant.
I thought it was closer 10%?
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
Please http://remember.to/edit_messages on lists to be sure I read
http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ gopher://g.towers.org.uk/ email@example.com
Creative copyleft computing services via http://www.ttllp.co.uk/