On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 06:56:53PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 10:08:50AM -0300, Margarita Manterola wrote: > > How about having a new section, "open-source", or something, for the > > things that fall in the category described above? (i.e. software that > > is _almost_ free, but has some small limitation over some freedom) > > Debian is hard pressed to consistently distinguish "free" from "not free"; > it doesn't seem like a practical use of time to have a "sort of free" > category in between. > > That said, there have been discussions about ways to break down non-free > further, without necessarily creating new sections, eg. > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2005/04/msg00066.html > > to allow, for example, CD vendors to more easily tell which parts of > non-free they can safely distribute without satisfying extra conditions.
Also, James Troup indicated (at LCA2005 yesterday) that it WOULD be necessary to separate non-free into auto-buildable and not if anything is going to be auto-built. Given the increased importance of non-free post-sarge this seems like a good idea. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
