Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The reason seems to be completely political. There are no > technical merits to it. Letting outselves be driven by politics may > not be beneficial. As a change there needs to be some justification and > a solid reason to make such a change. The creators apparently felt > there was reason for non-free to exist. Non-free is clearly beneficial > to debian developers and users, else no one would have packaged it.
As I have said before, I have not yet decided what my position will be on this GR when it comes to a vote. I do object to misstatements on either side of the issue. The creators apparently did _not_ feel there was reason for non-free to exist. In the Debian Manifesto Ian Murdock said that Debian would be distributed by The Free Software Foundation. This would effectively prevent a non-free section. Bob -- _ |_) _ |_ Robert D. Hilliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |_) (_) |_) 1294 S.W. Seagull Way <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Palm City, FL USA PGP Key ID: A8E40EB9