On 2004-01-04 05:26:03 +0000 Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
So, though I am sympathetic in part to the folks that want to
get rid of non-free, I am also concerned for the users of such
software -- and I would be far more likely to vote for the proposal
if there were reasonable expectation of these not falling between the
cracks.
Some level of support for this would probably actually improve debian,
especially non-debian packages of software and any hypothetical
distribution of services when we dominate the world. Maybe package
metadata should include info for reportbug-type packages to use. What
else could be useful here? Should clause 1's "non-free" terms be
recast as "non-debian" and pledge support for interoperability?
[...]
Asking those who disagree with its use to create it seems unfair.
As someone has said, asking those who agre with its use, and
who do the work of packaging the software, to support its
removal is equally unfair.
As far as I have noticed, no-one has explicitly asked the minority who
package for non-free to support the GR, unless they are involved in
the infrastructure. Maybe they should, as there seem to be 120 or so
of them, which is about 12% if the "about a thousand" on
http://www.debian.org/intro/about is accurate. 8 of those only package
for non-free, which I find curious. I didn't count how many only have
things in non-free as a related work of something of theirs in main
yet. Maybe someone with non-free on their machines can obtain these
numbers more easily.
Interesting question: should only GRs that expect unanimity be
proposed? I think that would be very limiting.
--
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
Please http://remember.to/edit_messages on lists to be sure I read
http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ gopher://g.towers.org.uk/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Creative copyleft computing services via http://www.ttllp.co.uk/