Daniel Kahn Gillmor said: > Debian Social Contract I'm reminded of what Stefano Zacchiroli said when he started this, that Debian already asserts a clear separation already.
I also think of what the FSF has published [2], that it's "not thoroughly separated" to them. > two sets of infrastructure maintained I wonder if it needs to go that far? Apache has supported virtual hosts for a long time. Is there an opportunity to make the separation between what "is" and "is not" Debian even clearer, and to do it in a way that remains consistent with Debian's social contract? [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2012/07/msg00016.html [2] http://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html#Debian
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Fsf-collab-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/fsf-collab-discuss
