On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 05:39:53PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote: > On 2004-03-05 15:53:13 +0000 Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > >Yeah, but wasn't one of the argument of dropping non-free the fact > >that > >that would put pressure on upstreams of non-free packages to change > >their licence. [...] > > Not one of mine. I'm not sure what effect it has on that, but I > suspect a net zero. Maybe someone else will discuss that with you. > > >>As you know, I think the best likely package benefit comes for those > >>with > >>unproblematic licences not hosted by Debian, but I see that you are > >>careful > >>to exclude that from your question. > >Err, i have difficulties parsing you here, could you clarify that for > >me ? > > I think that it may encourage improved support for non-Debian-hosted > packages in general, including project-produced packages and backport > projects.
And ? Is this a good thing, or a negative effect on the global amount of non-free sfotware in general ? This would mean, not having a relative small, and negatively viewed non-free repository on the debian archive, but an officially recognized proliferation of third party non-free packages we have no control on. I seriously doubt that this would be a good thing. Friendly, Sven Luther