Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes: > There _is_ a change: one day we're distributing non-free, the next, > we're not. That's the important change. It's not a change of policy, > certainly, it's instead a claim that the *existing* policy does *not* > need to be changed to meet the concern that Debian will always be > distributing non-free software.
Except that there will probably always be non-free software, and even if the amount on debian.org goes to zero, it might go positive the next week. > > Really? What is it? What is the system for removing packages from > > non-free? > > The maintainer says "this package is no longer needed" or "this packages > has been relicensed under the GPL" or similar, and it gets removed. What > did you think it was? I believe this is an inadequate system. What do you think of a compromise position which would allow a package in non-free only if there is no free package filling the same niche?
