On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 10:02:40PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote: > On 2004-01-06 09:33:51 +0000 Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > >Ok, so then, please someone write a nice software ADSL library, so my > >unicorn ADSL modem driver can go in main. > > Asking for it is a start, but maybe this should be done more visibly > than an email to debian-vote. There may be other things you can do to > help this, too.
Ok, where ? BTW, for your information, i have been lobbying as best i could with my upstream for a free version, or at least have them commit themself to provide binaries for more than just x86, which i believe will be such a pain in the long run that freeing the stuff would be easier. > >And let's remove all that bunch of non-free documentation that > >currently > >is in main. [...] > > FWIW, I agree. > > >And what was my last example, a yes, lha. I hear there are some free > >versions of this one around. > > Do you have a name? I suspect this may be easier to find for someone > who can read Japanese. Nope, i just remember some posts about this 4 or so years ago. But this is a good example i can use below. > >[...] it would be far better to have some plan to > >phase out non-free software from debian than to remove non-free. > > (It is not part of debian, we were told in the past. Opponents of the > suggested GR seem to forget that and talk of things like removing from > debian, or phasing out from debian.) What's your suggested plan for I don't really care if it is part of debian or not, what we are speaking about here is the debian infrastructure. If we were to move non-free to a virtual non-free host or something, pointing to the real debian infrastructure, this would be fine with me, but seriously, i don't see what would be gained by it. > how to make your suggestions happen? You use non-free, so you're > better placed to tell us what is acceptable. As seen elsewhere, if a > non-user suggests things, we get rebuffed. Ok, what i have in mind, is a place, for each individual package in non-free, where would be listed the reasons why the package is non-free, and also what could be done and has been done to make it more free. Maybe a simple bug report against the package would be enough, with a "why is foo non-free" link from the PTS. All discussions on the non-freeness of the package, including discussion with upstream and such would be listed there, as to not get lost as in the lha case mentioned above. Also, this place would be a place for discussion about a strategy to free or replace the given code, and maybe indicate potential replacements, with their problems that would make them still not fully able to replace the package. Ideally this would be accompanied by an alioth project or something, also listed from the PTS in a "what can i do to help free foo" like link, were people interested in freeing the package can go and actually help replacing the non-free code or whatever needs to get done. Friendly, Sven Luther
