On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 11:13:11AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote: > On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 03:51:07PM +0000, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > > Mutt uses debbugs, and isn't a project of the magnitude of GNOME. > > Which still doesn't make it comparable to non-free. > > On the one hand, it's much more cohesive: instead of dozens of unrelated > packages you have mut. > > On the other hand, it's a development project, not a distribution of > stuff available from elsewhere.
You appear to be grasping. What critera must another project possess for you to regard it as "comparable to non-free"? What are non-free's essential characteristics, to your mind? You need to identify traits other than "something maintained by Debian", else you're begging the question. -- G. Branden Robinson | Debian GNU/Linux | Please do not look directly into [EMAIL PROTECTED] | laser with remaining eye. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
