Re: "keep non-free" proposal
Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> writes:
> Out of main and into? And latest news report on this spoke of at least
> 6 more month.
As I said, time delay doesn't bother me. Latest reports said that
movement may happen. Bugs have been filed against the relevant
packages.
> Well, the problem here is where you draw the line. what is acceptable in
> non-free and what is not. I would prefer a case by case analysis.
Sure, some of that is probably necessary regardless. The kind of
compromise I might be content with would involve some independent
review of the question.
> Also, i think you forgot my own proposal, which was then gone into
> Raul's one, and later abandoned in the many iterations thereof.
Well, you didn't push your proposal enough to want it to be on the
ballot. If you wanted that bigger ballot; if people wanted something
there that wasn't being offered, why did they not propose something?
Instead we got the "reaffirm non-free" resolution, which is about as
vacant as I can imagine.
I wish you hadn't allowed your own proposal to get co-opted into
Raul's.
Thomas
Reply to: