On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 10:56:58AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > (I'm obviously happy to see you resorting to ad hominems as it probably > means you have no more arguments.)
You're the one trying to convince people of a new position (that non-free dependencies in main are acceptable), so you're the one giving arguments; I'm among those giving counterarguments. So, unless you have further arguments, there's nothing more for me to respond to. The SC is very clear: no non-free requirements--if you want to try to change the SC, go for it. -- Glenn Maynard