On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 01:31:44PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Branden Robinson:
> > Where does the Social Contract bind us to using no tool other than the DFSG > > to determine whether a work we distribute as part of our system is free? > We are obligated to our users not to remove (maybe even reject) > software without reason. We are obligated to serve the interests of our users and free software. This is *no* obligation to accept all free software into the archive. Even though ftp-master appears to follow the policy that any software which is free, minimally usable, and policy-compliant is allowed in, it is their *choice* to implement this policy (probably because it's the path of least resistance), not an obligation imposed by the social contract. > I doubt that the test du jour can serve as an adequate foundation for > removal, especially if the failure of the test can not be tracked back > to a DFSG violation. If "the mplayer upstream developers are controlled by evil alien cephalopods" is a procedurally valid reason to keep a package out of Debian, than so is the Chinese dissident test. As for package removals, it is always in the hands of the ftp-masters to act on a removal request (or not). The only criterion that matters is whether the ftp-masters are persuaded that removal is the right thing to do. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
