On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 01:36:57PM +0900, Ionutz Borcoman wrote: > What I'm really missing in our current state is an explanation in the > description of non-free telling me why is that package there.
Ian Jackson proposed this well over a year ago, but nobody seems to have done anything about it. (Well, I did, but not too many people use xtrs.) > To conclude, I will probably vote for keeping the current state of > splitting (all stuff on the same server with main, non-free and contrib > branches). But I would like to see (in time, not immediately) that > non-free packages explains why they are not free from the very > beginning, aka in the description field of the package. Probably this > should be imposed through the policy for non-free packages. I think we should do both. -- G. Branden Robinson | The errors of great men are venerable Debian GNU/Linux | because they are more fruitful than the [EMAIL PROTECTED] | truths of little men. cartoon.ecn.purdue.edu/~branden/ | -- Friedrich Nietzsche
pgpuswt9R9xQf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
