On Fri, Jan 02, 2004 at 09:14:30PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote: > On 2004-01-02 20:08:33 +0000 Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Are you talking about > >http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/debian-vote-200401/msg00001.html? > > Dunno. I'm not at my connected machine when writing this. If it is the > list of Java packages, then yes. > > >Your 2:36PM followup to that message didn't really give any specifics > >about why you thought some of those packages could go into main. > > When I last asked, the problem was not having a java in main. I think > that problem has gone away, so I wonder why they are still there. It's > not directly relevant to -vote now. Please reply off-list or > elsewhere.
Ok, so then, please someone write a nice software ADSL library, so my unicorn ADSL modem driver can go in main. And let's remove all that bunch of non-free documentation that currently is in main. After all, i see no reason why ocaml-doc (and ocaml-book for that matter, which contains the whole html version of some oreilly ocaml book) have to be no more supported by debian, while we have loads of non-free documentation in main (and not even all of them covered by the gnu documentation licence problems if i remember well). And what was my last example, a yes, lha. I hear there are some free versions of this one around. I would be happy to package it if this was the case, please point me to alternatives, and we can remove lha from non-free, no problem. The reality is that removing non-free (or whatever you want to call it) is just a demagogic issue, it would be far better to have some plan to phase out non-free software from debian than to remove non-free. And handle each case individually. Have the non-free software listed somewhere, with the exact reason why they are non-free, and have some way for people to contribute on getting either a free alternative or working on freeing the software, some status report or such, in summary a way to help each piece of non-free software be freed. So, please, stop this demagogical non-sense that clutters our mailing boxes, and start acting on a way to replace all the software in non-free by free versions. And i would support a way of removing non-free that is flexible. Let's say that we say we provide infrastructure for distributing non-free, but also to help orient people to free alternative, either as users or as developers. What do you think of that ? Would this not be a much more valuable goal for Free/Open Software/Source people to obtain, than this lamentable flamewar that only stops us from spending our valuable time doing real work ? Friendly, Sven Luther
