On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 05:28:31AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote: > On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 05:51:21PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > > If I were to propose a rewrite the social contract, it'd probably look > > something like: > I wonder why nobody talks about "we will support people running LSB > binaries".
(a) Because "support" isn't really what we're talking about here -- we're worried not about whether bugs in glibc that only appear when using non-free software will get fixed (they will), but rather whether we'll allow our infrastructure (archive, bts, mailing lists, etc) to be used for non-free software. (b) Because there's no particular reason to treat non-LSB non-free software worse than LSB non-free software. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. Australian DMCA (the Digital Agenda Amendments) Under Review! -- http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/copyright/digitalagenda
pgpxsHRZ9myrQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
