On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 09:05:37AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote: > Craig Sanders wrote: > > ALMOST FREE > > ----------- > > While I appreciate your effort, non-free means that the package doesn't meet > the DFSG but can be distributed by Debian and our mirrors. According to our > own guidelines the packages are not free, since they fail one or more clauses > of our guidelines. Calling then "almost free" or "semi-free" is only sham.
sorry, but you are wrong. most of the packages in that group *ARE* almost-free. many of them even (almost half, at a guess) qualify as 'semi-free' by the FSF's overly strict definition. admittedly, i should have called that section "OTHER" because there were several packages in there that did not qualify as almost or semi free, but that was a mistake due to tiredness and haste rather than a "sham". craig PS: it's nice to see people nitpicking over trivial details - it makes a refreshing change from actually engaging with the substance. well done! who wants to have a productive debate, anyway? far better to go around and around in circles, flaming each other over spelling and grammar. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
