On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 09:54:16AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote: > On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 04:45:54PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > > > The only way clearly say what will happen is to make it part of the > > > ballot. Your poll will *not* say what will happen, and nobody else here > > > can say what will happen either, because we do not know how a vote will > > > turn out. > > > > Why are you opposing this. Just for the chance to discuss this to death > > another year or so ? > > No; for precisely the opposite reason. I want a vote now, and no poll > to delay it.
So, let's start from my poll draft, and let's vote on it. What do you thinkg ? Something like : --- start non-free removal GR draft ---- Provided the social contract get's ammended by a 3:1 majority to let us act accordyingly to this vote, we will now take a decision about what we want to do about the non-free archive on the debian servers. Proposition A : Keep non-free. Rationale : non-free is usefull for our user who needs it, as a bridge for a given piece of software who may one day become non-free, and for other reasons. So let's keep it. (No social contract change is needed) Proposition B : Remove non-free. Rationale : non-free is the epythoma of evil, let's purge it from our servers :)) (well, not seriously, but you are better placed to provide a rationale here). (Needs a social contract change though) Proposition C : Remove the non-free packages case by case. Rationale : the non-freeness of the packages in non-free is of varying quality, so let's look at it case per case, and remove those that have no chance to ever becoming free, those that are badly maintained and nobody cares about and those that have a free replacement. (No social contract change is needed) Proposition D : Remove the none-free packages case by case, but also provide infrastructure for actively making non-free packages not needed anymore. Rationale : same as above, but we additionnally will provide guidance to users of non-free packages about what free alternative best suits them, and an infrastructure for discussing licencing changes with upstream and/or orienting interested developers to where they can help free the package or improve the alternatives. It would be the non-free maintainers packages responsability to manage this, on infrastructure provided by the debian project. (Social contract could be changed to mention we support users, but actively encourage people to migrate from non-free software to free replacements). Proposition E : Remove non-free, as well as any hint of non-free packages still hiding in main, the whole of contrib and all non-free packag installers. Rationale : after all, why show favoritism for the packages in main whose we were not honest enough to move into non-free, contrib is of no use without main, and installer of non-free stuff are of no use without the non-free stuff they install, and thus don't belong into debian. --- end non-free removal GR draft ---- Friendly, Sven -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
