On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 11:20:51PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 10:41:53PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote: > > Uptime and infrastructure (including archive, BTS and perhaps PTS[1]) > > I will believe in it once i see it. I have serious doubts, but please, > go ahead, and prove me wrong. > > That said, i wonder if the energy spent on that could not have been > better spent in something else, and if being able to be said as not > containing non-free is worth it.
I can't parse that. Of course, the energy would be better spent on Free Software, I didn't cry for an alternative once non-free is dropped, d'oh. > This whole thing seems really hypocrit to me though, since the aim seems > to be for debian to drop non-free, but still provide non-free under > another name. 'Debian' certainly will not provide non-free. Somebody will provide the resources, one or two maintainers will keep it going and the individual package maintainers will provide the packages. At least, that's how I think it could work. Michael