Re: Proposal: Keep non-free
On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 10:50:15AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 10:34:23AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * Martin Schulze (email@example.com) [040226 10:25]:
> > > Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > > * Martin Schulze (firstname.lastname@example.org) [040226 08:55]:
> > > > > We cannot include it in Debian anyway, since it is non-free. If Debian
> > > > > stops distributing it but people will build ftp.non-free.org, what's
> > > > > the different from the users' perspective? A new apt-line. Oh horror...
> > > > What do we gain from replacing non-free on Debian with
> > > > ftp.non-free.org?
> > > ftp.non-free.org would not have to be maintained by Debian, contrary
> > > to ftp.debian.org.
> > Is there someone to maintain ftp.non-free.org than, or is this just a
> > theoretical case?
> I was trying to see what's needed and how to do it for non-free.org and
> have a discussion about this on this list a while ago, but the response
> was anything but enthusiastic. Seems the 'keep non-free' people don't
> want to talk about it, because they, uhm, don't want it to happen
> regardless of how easy to use the alternative would be, while the 'drop
> non-free' people don't want to contaminate themselves with non-free at
It is not that we don't want it to happen, by all way, implement it, and
if it fullfills all its promise, i would be glad to move my non-free
packages to it, but i will not use my time and energy to make it happen,
as i have less wasteful ways of using my free time, working on my
packages in debian/main, on d-i, and on other free projects.
Also, i want to point out that this non-free.org thingy, maintained by
debian people, providing packages maintained by debian people, and
having to intertie neatly with the remaining of debian packages in main,
would be a shame. It is not because you name it non-free.org that it
will not be linked to debian anymore than us saying non-free is not part
of debian. So is the effort involved really worth it ? Just that some
bunch of hypocrits can be satisfied that 'debian doesn't distribute
non-free stuff', and are able to close the eyes on non-free.org while
they could not on debian/non-free ?
And finally, i believe that a non-free.org would not be a good thing, it
would be even worse as debian/non-free is, and a danger to the project,
since it could well be that it may take more importance in the future,
and that people who would contribute to debian may be more interested in
contributing to non-free.org instead, with its less restrictive rules,
and sometimes quite desdaining debian-legal folk. Do you really want to
be the one responsible for this ? For an eventual future fork of debian ?