[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: General Resolution: Handling of the non-free section: proposedBallot

On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 12:09:36PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> writes:
> > Yeah, failing arguments, you play with words, how usual of this thread.
> Huh?  No, I said what the changes would be, and they are very
> important changes to me.  They are not important to you perhaps, but
> it is true that they are important to me.

I don't see how _my_ failure to communicate with exactitude, and taking
shortcuts, does in any way support your argumentation. It is not a
unclarity of my thoughts and feeling, just a failure to bring this
clearly into words. And you choose to attack me on the form rather than
on the content.

> And it is true that the packages are not part of Debian now; if you
> think they are, *that* is a problem.  If you cannot keep it straight
> in your own head, then we will never expect our users to--and there is
> a constant flood of users who think this is a proposal to "remove
> non-free from Debian", indicating that they haven't gotten it straight
> either.

See above about that. They are not part of the debian project, but they
are available on the debian archive, as a service to our users who need
them. This is how i feel about that, and if i might not have stated this
as clearly as i should, blame it on too fast writing, poor english
mastery and other such things, not on what you want to blame it.

> I don't expect this to convince you, of course, but I expect that
> those who are uncertain might find it helpful.

Yeah, trying to use this for your arguments instead of going to the, how
do you say it in english, in french you would distinguish between the
'fond' and the 'forme'. 

> > And more to the point, do you really think moving the non-free stuff out
> > of the debian archive and onto a separate archive would be something
> > more than a fiction to make you non-free removal advocate happy ? 
> It would not be a fiction.  It would, in fact, cease the branding of
> the packages and it would cease the devoting of Debian resources to
> them.  That's what would make me happy.  

A, yes ? And the fact that debian ressource would be used for setting
this alternative archive up and maintaining those packages is not to be
considered ? Debian ressource in the form of volunteer time, which is
maybe the only asset debian really has ? 


Sven Luther

Reply to: