On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 05:41 +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote: > Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 03:41:21PM -0400, Roberto C. S?nchez wrote: > >> Given the great abundance of revision control systems already packaged > >> for Debian, what is the point of adding another? Especially when it is > >> non-free. > > > > How about "people use it"? There's plenty of installations of > > perforce; I think making it easier to use Debian with them is > > within the mandate for non-free. > I'd say upload only the client to non-free. > > We should provide users a way to use their existent preforce servers but > we should not encourage new installations of perforce. > > Sounds like a compromise to me :) Indeed, my primary aim was to make it easy for anyone wanting to run debian in an org that uses perforce (i.e. people like myself). I agree the server package is of less use in this respect, its simply there to make it easy for people to choose debian on the server side as well. Pending the legal conclusions I'll upload just the client package initially.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part