Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 09:24:02PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > > Sven implied that there is a time for removing non-free, but that this > > isn't it. You are saying that any time a maintainer wants to put a > > non-free package on the Debian server, this should be possible. You > > are proposing no change, ever. > > No, I'm proposing we change when everyone's writing free software, > because the recognise that it's the best way of doing development and > there's no benefit, short term or long term to them in doing anything > else. Including Microsoft and nVidia. I don't have any particular concern > if this doesn't happen within my lifetime.
Right, but that's no change. We don't have to do anything to have non-free vanish with the last package in it. That's the *current* system. I don't object to the fact that you are entirely happy with the current system. Sven seemed to be saying something different: that the current system needs to change, but not yet. > The claim that "non-free isn't in Debian" is smoke and mirrors. It's not > even what the social contract claims -- it says "We promise to keep the > Debian GNU/Linux Distribution entirely free software". Um, so I'm a little confused. What's the difference between "non-free isn't in Debian" and "we promise to keep Debian entirely free"? Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
