Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Sven LUTHER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > What will happen to them, would they still be able to use the BTS for their
> > packages ? Or should they make provision for having their own apt-gettable
> > repository for people to download. I think not everyone has the ressources
> to
> > do that.
>
> I'm sure there is a great number of people out there who love non-free
> software so much that they would happily keep a repository alive.
Please don't make such assumptions when replying to such a valid
criticism. I maintain some non-free packages because I feel that
they are needed, and I might not do it if the burden becomes
excessive (such as having to build an outside home and BTS for
them).
> > If that will happen, the non-free packages will not have the
> > guarantee of quality that they have now, and this will result in
> > people downloading non-free packages from who knows where and may
> > causes bugs, security problems, name space clashes, policy
> > violation, etc ...
>
> We already have all those problems because of non-free. The only
> program on my system that does not more or less always function nicely
> and reliably is Netscape.
Please don't paint all of non-free with the nertscape brush.
Some stuff is in non-free because it cannot be sold.
Peter
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
