Re: General Resolution: Handling of the non-free section: proposedBallot
On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 08:03:41PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> On 2004-03-04 18:30:48 +0000 Remi Vanicat <vanicat@debian.org> wrote:
>
> >Fortunately, there is enough time to challenge more people forgetting
> >that some of our user need non-free driver to install some hardware on
> >their computer, and that without a non-free replacement, we are
> >forgetting them and their need. Fortunately.
>
> I'm not forgetting the emails to which you refer. I'm just very laggy.
>
> I'd say those users need better hardware rather than non-free drivers.
Well, this would be problematic for people trying to install debian on
preexistant hardware, or on assorted donated stuff or other older
hardware, don't you think.
> It also doesn't say anything about whether they need non-free to be
> hosted by debian. The relative popularity of the non-debian-hosted
> java packages suggests not.
Sure, but please tell me, if we are going to move non-free stuff to
non-free.org, exactly how will that change anything over the current
situation in regard with packages with problematic licences ? Apart from
the fact that the global cost to debian developers and infrastructure
may be higher that is.
I think i would rather vote for completely removing non-free and
forgetting about the packages, over such a smoke and mirror measure
which would be to move the packages to another server, and continue
business as usual.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: