Hi! * Mike Dupont <jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com> [120128 19:14]: > Well in general I would opposed including any sources that cannot be > built using free and approved tools, that is basically saying there is > no source, or no means to get from source to binary. > > lets imagine that you have rebol, a language that has no specification > and no source code, you can release a rebol package and say :" it is > free software" , but you should not be able to make a free debian > package with that in my humble opinion because it would no be > buildable.
That's also the stance of the ftp team: swf-files, even their source is available and licendes under a DFSG-free license, are consider not suitable for main. We regularily reject packages because of that. Usually the source is repacked and the swf files are removed. > also, we are on the mentors list, are we really going to mentor > non-free software and use up our time resources for helping people > package non free software? "We acknowledge that some of our users require the use of works that do not conform to the Debian Free Software Guidelines. [..] Thus, although non-free works are not a part of Debian, we support their use and provide infrastructure for non-free packages (such as our bug tracking system and mailing lists)." Debian Social contract, Number 5. However, if you don't like non-free / contrib software, you are free to ignore the discussions about them. Best Regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120128202026.gb32...@melusine.alphascorpii.net