Re: Why Anthony Towns is wrong
Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> writes:
> non-free is part of the debian infrastructure, since we promised in
> section 5 that we would distribute it from the debian ftp servers.
> non-free is not part of the debian distribution though, otherwise called
> debian/main.
But you have also referred to non-free as part of Debian.
> Thomas, would you be satisfied if the non-free archive was continued to
> be kept on the debian servers and infrastructure, but only accessible
> by a non-free.org DNS magic?
No. That would be an improvement, but it would not be enough. There
is also the BTS, and the reporting of it on the web pages which tie it
closely to the distribution, etc.
> This would cause the less burden to our ressources (ressources as in
> volunteer time donation, what other ressource do we have), while
> achieving the cosmetic goal which seems so important to you of not
> having non-free programs visibly related to the debian project. If
> not, could you please come up with a sane rationale on why not ?
My goal is not cosmetic, it is to have Debian not support non-free as
a part of the Debian project. If that were merely cosmetic, then you
wouldn't be complaining so much.
> Also, i would like to know what you find more important. That we move
> non-free to another server network not related to debian, even if the
> same debian maintainers work on it, or working to make the individual
> non-free package not needed anymore, either by freeing them, or by
> strengthening free alternatives ?
These are not alternatives. Both are important. Distributing
non-free does nothing to help either.
> And finally, i would like to know if you (or other non-free removal
> proponents) may be part of a corporation or other organisation, which
> may have a vested interest in maintaining an alternative non-free.org
> archive, and how you expect to guarantee that the creation of such an
> external entity may not divert ressources from the debian distribution
> (also called debian/main) to this external fork we have no control over.
Puhleez.
> Has it ? Please tell me, which hardware plateform are you running, and
> do you have access to a free licenced copy of your bios code, and of the
> individual hardware components of your computer ?
Those hardware components, and the BIOS, are not part of Debian. My
goal was never to make Debian run without any non-free software in the
room. It's to make Debian 100% Free Software.
> And do you believe the same courtesy the debian project as a whole gave
> you in providing you easy access to these pieces of software might not
> be extended to those who right now still benefit from packages in
> non-free you have no use for ?
If you want to provide easy access, go to it.
Reply to: